 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Blacker v. Crapo, AC 28703,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claims for breach of contract and violation of Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42-110a et seq., were upheld; contractor's failure to comply with Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42-135a(2) mandatory notice requirement rendered contract unenforceable against home owners. Contractor had to return home owners' deposit.
|
|||||
| Blinkoff v. O & G Indus., AC 28506,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As a quarry operator failed to present any evidence that certain of the prohibited conduct alleged occurred within the statutory period, and there was no other conduct within the statutory period that arguably could support the continuing course of conduct doctrine, the CUTPA action was barred by the statute of limitations.
|
|||||
| Fedus v. Zoning & Planning Comm'n, AC 29350,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of appeal of commission's site plan approval was reversed. Discretion was not abused in delaying final approval for architectural elements or determining that stormwater reduction was not substantial, but there was no exception to Town of Colchester, Conn., Zoning Regs., ¿ 12.5.4 requirement that pipes be made of reinforced concrete.
|
|||||
| Grey v. Conn. Indem. Servs., AC 29319,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Record supported finding that a home renovator waived her contractual right to arbitrate a breach of contract action where the renovator had litigated the case for nearly three years during which time she filed motions, engaged in discovery, participated in trial management conferences, and participated in court annexed mediation.
|
|||||
| JSA Fin. Corp. v. Quality Kitchen Corp., AC 29045,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As guarantee contract permitted the holder of a note to alter the time, manner, and terms of repayment without notice to guarantor, fact that guarantor was not aware of and did not consent to a partial payment by maker did not prevent such payment from tolling the six-year statute of limitations for nonpayment on note, Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42a-3-118.
|
|||||
| Necaise v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 29285,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if counsel's failure to file motion to suppress identification evidence in assault case was deficient performance, inmate's habeas claim of ineffective assistance failed. He did not satisfy the prejudice prong of Strickland test as he failed to produce evidence in support of claim that identification process was unnecessarily suggestive.
|
|||||
| Patterson v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 28800,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Habeas appeal was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the court could not afford the inmate any practical relief, as the inmate was released from imprisonment before the appellate court heard oral argument, and the inmate failed to establish an exception to the mootness doctrine.
|
|||||
| State v. Bell, AC 29893,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's consciousness of guilt instruction in defendant's murder trial was not improper or an abuse of discretion. Taken as a whole, the trial court properly instructed the jury that, if the State proved that defendant fled to New York, defendant's consciousness of guilt could be inferred from that flight.
|
|||||
| Urich v. Fish, AC 29030,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 3, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly awarded attorney's fees to the buyer of a yacht under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42-110g(d) because the buyer prevailed on his counterclaim pursuant to the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42-110a et seq., and, therefore, was a counterclaim plaintiff not a defendant.
|
|||||
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. |
