 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Kent v. Kent, CV010384655S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Application for prejudgment remedy required court to determine if there was probable cause that judgment would be rendered in amount of remedy sought or greater. Court found probable cause. Statute of repose was not unconstitutional.
|
|||||
| Nicholas v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Wilton, CV000176705S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Notes written on subdivision map regarding exchanges of parcels of property were not mandatory. Record revealed that lot was part of approved subdivision and thus it was protected as nonconforming lot.
|
|||||
| Paulson v. Blake, CV0010384958,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to strike for misjoinder was denied where motion was dependent on facts not alleged in pleadings, requiring court to examine evidence to determine misjoinder issue. Court was not allowed to seek beyond complaint in motion to strike.
|
|||||
| Sherman v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Fairfield, CV010385671,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defect in service of citation and copy of appeal from zoning board's decision was not due to defective citation and was not plaintiffs' fault, strict adherence to service of process statute would have been unjust; appeal was retained.
|
|||||
| Shoreline Care v. Eng'rs, X06CV940155982S(CLD),
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET AT WATERBURY, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The partnership argued a continuing course of conduct by a subcontractor as tolling the statute of limitations. However, subsequent efforts at repair of the air conditioning system were irrelevant since the claim was based upon design defects.
|
|||||
| State v. Stairs, MV990194202S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Wyatt, MV990445507S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's application for entry into a pre-trial alcohol education program after being charged with DWI was denied; the conduct with which defendant was charged was sufficiently egregious to justify a denial of the program.
|
|||||
| Sullivan v. Delisa, CVN0091831FA,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: For prejudgment remedy, there needed to be probable cause that plaintiff would prevail in trial on merits. Where there was no probable cause that plaintiffs would prevail on claims raised, prejudgment remedy was denied.
|
|||||
| Velenchik v. First Union Nat'l Bank, CV000372515,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
