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.
	State Courts - Connecticut - January 10, 2002
	Vitale v. City of Bridgeport, CV00374431S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 10, 2002, Decided , January 10, 2002, Filed View this case - free   Overview: The administration of firefighter test, and preparation of its components, were neither unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious or illegal. Therefore, firefighter employees were not adversely affected by the manner of determining the passing score. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Webster v. Pequot Mystic Hotel, 556799, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, January 10, 2002, Decided View this case - free   Overview: Motion to strike claims for wrongful discharge, NIED, and IIED was denied where failure to terminate former employee would have violated public policy requiring safe workplace and conduct alleged went beyond bounds of decency. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Weiss v. Weiss, 0065932S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, AT PUTNAM, January 10, 2002, Filed View this case - free   Overview: The court lacked subject matter jurisdiction as the alternate trustee did not have standing to sue defendants for violations of the irrevocable trust as he was not the trustee nor a beneficiary, co-trustee, or successor trustee of the trust. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	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.