 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ammirata v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, CV 990335586S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, January 7, 2000, Decided , January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A nonconforming use of property predating a zoning regulation was ordered, subject to a land management plan, and subject to the current requirement to conform to the zoning regulation.
|
|||||
| Barry v. Barry, FA 80187341,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alimony order was modified since plaintiff wife's income increased and defendant husband's income decreased, which constituted a substantial change in circumstances, supporting the modification.
|
|||||
| Blake v. Vann, CV 970342400S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 7, 2000, Decided , January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant did not have actual notice of the institution of the action, he did not know he was a proper party, and he would have been prejudiced, the amended complaint did not relate back to the original complaint.
|
|||||
| Goldstein v. Mitoi, Inc., CV 980416934S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 7, 2000, Decided , January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parties' motions for summary judgment were denied, since the enforceability of the liquidated damages clause in the parties' contract presented issues of material fact that made summary judgment inappropriate.
|
|||||
| Marello v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., CV 970406419S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 7, 2000, Decided , January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An insurer's objections were properly overruled because an action against the insurer based on a claim of bad faith required the disclosure of the insurer's complete claims file.
|
|||||
| Peterson v. Freitag, CV 990591239S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An injured golf cart user could not bring a negligence claim and a products liability claim arising out of the same golf cart accident because the products liability statute was the exclusive remedy for claims within its scope.
|
|||||
| Santiago v. State, CV 980579082,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, January 7, 2000, Decided , January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where issues were sufficiently similar, petitioner's objections to the introduction of testimony from a previous hearing were overruled.
|
|||||
| Schrader v. Real Time Mktg. Co., CV 980583763,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was denied, since issues of material fact existed as to whether he was entitled to a full commission, or only a prorated percentage, based the time he was terminated.
|
|||||
| Siade v. Constitution Mgmt. Corp., CV 940535192S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, January 7, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property manager's indemnification claim against snow removal service that it hired was denied; in slip and fall trial, jury found that snow removal service's negligence, if any, was not proximate cause of plaintiff's injury.
|
|||||
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. |
