 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Built in Am. v. Morris, CV010454752,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although plaintiff who sought temporary injunction mistakenly referred to prejudgment remedy statute, errors were not fatal, paperwork was sufficient to initiate action, and motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was denied.
|
|||||
| Decorso v. Watchtower Bible, CV980145296S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: To avoid excessive entanglement of church and state, First Amendment barred former member's negligent infliction of emotional distress claim against religious society and agents who counseled her to stay in abusive relationship.
|
|||||
| Dejesus v. Rowe, CV010446290S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 8, 2002, Decided , January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion for summary judgment was granted where injured party met burden of proof to show no genuine issues of material fact remained as to liability. Case fitted into exception of general rule concerning summary judgment in negligence cases.
|
|||||
| Doucette v. New Britain Gen. Hosp., X03CV990503504S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET, AT NEW BRITAIN, January 8, 2002, Decided , January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Amended disclosure was insufficient where opposing counsel was merely told general areas about which experts were to testify and very general sources on which their opinions were based, not basis or grounds of particular opinions they arrived at.
|
|||||
| Educ. Ass'n v. Clinton Bd. of Educ., (SC 16537),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 8, 2002, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under teacher negotiation act, review panel was required to conduct de novo review of arbitration panel's decision on contested contract issues between teachers and education board.
|
|||||
| Hernandez v. Cirmo, (AC 21138),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 8, 2002, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctor did not overcome issue of propriety of his actions. Patient did not show he knew of misdiagnosis or increased risk triggering duty to warn. Patient had ample time to proffer evidentiary affidavits.
|
|||||
| Ladola v. Planning & Zoning Comm'n Windsor Locks, CV000800061,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 8, 2002, Decided , January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neighbors' appeal of zoning decision was sustained where undisputed facts required property owners to comply with town zoning regulation and, in absence of such compliance, zoning commission acted in error in approving site plan.
|
|||||
| McMann v. Burr, CV000071808,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND, AT ROCKVILLE, January 8, 2002, Decided , January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Injured party was awarded damages for non-pecuniary losses, including physical pain and suffering, mental and emotional distress, and in particular anxiety and fear, concerning possible surgery and its unpredictable risks of increased disability.
|
|||||
| Nieves v. Cirmo, (AC 21139),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 8, 2002, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctor did not overcome issue of propriety of his actions. Patient did not show he knew of increased risk triggering duty to warn. Court was not required to make counsel's decision to admit supplemental evidence.
|
|||||
| Oguagha v. Oguagha, FA000378945S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dire financial straits of divorcing parties caused Connecticut court to issue very explicit orders to assure that they moved promptly to sell house neither could afford to keep.
|
|||||
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. |
