 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Anderson v. Gordon Muir & Foley, LLP, CV030827411S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an action by a former client claiming a law firm violated his civil rights, firm's motion to dismiss was granted because the client did not allege that the firm's lawyers were state officers, state officials, or acting in concert with the state.
|
|||||
| Barragan v. Norwalk Transit Dist., CV980358826,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As there were fact issues as to whether bus driver had notice of plaintiff's negligence suit before he was served with amended complaint, in which case claim was not time-barred under relation back doctrine, his summary judgment motion was denied.
|
|||||
| Blanc Page, Inc. v. Gehl, CV02391041S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a question of fact existed as to the parties' intent at the time of a purchase contract execution and a company viewed a promissory note out of context of the contract, the company's motion for summary judgment was denied.
|
|||||
| Ceruti v. Conn. Light & Power Co., X01CV030283033S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET AT WATERBURY, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Estate administrator's claim against the decedent's employers for violating the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act was stricken because the death of the decedent occurred solely within the confines of the employer-employee relationship.
|
|||||
| Cost Mgmt. Incentives, Inc. v. London-Osborne, CV020463081,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to reopen a judgment refusing to enjoin former employees from competing because restrictive covenants were unenforceable due to employer's sexual harassment was denied, as new evidence could have been discovered at trial and was irrelevant.
|
|||||
| DeFrancesco v. DeFrancesco, FA020468616,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the parties' marriage had broken down irretrievably, it was dissolved; the parties were awarded joint custody of a minor child, the marital residence was to be sold with the net proceeds divided, and the wife received temporary alimony.
|
|||||
| Dockter v. Slowik, CV030822311,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where seller failed to indicate to purchasers that well on property had dried up, contract for sale of property was rescinded; money damages could not make purchasers whole. Purchasers could not obtain reliable water supply anywhere else on property.
|
|||||
| Hoyt v. Geremia Dev. Corp., CV020470150S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a developer's efforts to apportion liability came after the expiration of the statutory 120-day period, a subcontractor's motion to strike could be granted.
|
|||||
| Kudlach v. Kudlach, FA030127305,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, January 7, 2004, Decided , January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a mother violated a stipulated agreement wherein a child was not to be with either parent less than three overnights during any calendar week, the father's petition for a specific access schedule was granted.
|
|||||
| Kumiega v. Dodson, CV99366347S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 7, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a trial court ordered the parties to select a trial date on the day that an arbitrator rendered an oral decision, the injured party reasonably presumed that no further action was required; thus, a default judgment against her was set aside.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
