|
|
| |
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!
|
| |
State Courts -
Connecticut - January 11, 2005
|
| |
|
| |
In re Jordan A., W10CP01013785A, W10CP01013786A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, CHILD PROTECTION SESSION AT MIDDLETOWN, January 11, 2005, Decided , January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
JJ&C Realty v. Crooks, CV020282137S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT MERIDEN, January 11, 2005, Decided , January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Judgment was entered in favor of a landlord in an action to recover for breach of a commercial lease; although the landlord had a duty to mitigate damages under Conn. Gen. Stat. ? 47a-11a, the landlord could still recover under the liquidated damages provision of the lease.
|
|
| |
Larson v. Larson, FA020187311,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, January 11, 2005, Decided , January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The father was not entitled to a modification of alimony pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. ? 46b-86 because the father failed to show a substantial change in circumstances. While his net income had decreased since the dissolution, his bankruptcy discharge and remarriage had lessened his financial obligations, and the mother's income had increased.
|
|
| |
MD Drilling & Blasting v. MLS Constr., LLC, CV030483616S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 11, 2005, Decided , January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Subcontractor proved its claims against a contractor for breach of contract and unjust enrichment where evidence showed that subcontractor agreed to perform work only if contractor paid debt to it, and contractor did not fulfill promise to pay debt.
|
|
| |
Meriden Fire Fighters Local 1148 v. City of Meriden, CV040287401S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT MERIDEN, January 11, 2005, Decided , January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Since the union did not make a showing that the city's interpretation of the contract was an effort to retaliate against certain members of the bargaining unit that filed workers' compensation claims, the arbitration award did not violate either Conn. Gen. Stat. ? 31-290a or the public policy it was designed to promote.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Mouning v. Parker, CV010381048,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where evidence showed that plaintiff continued to experience problems with her neck, that she suffered frequent headaches, and that she had a mild chord impingement as result of car accident involving defendant's vehicle, plaintiff was awarded judgment against defendant for $ 20,000, representing defendant's portion of responsibility for accident.
|
|
| |
New York State Dep't of Taxation v. Boone, CV030407833S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 11, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where taxpayer, through asserting special defenses, collaterally attacked tax warrant that New York State Department of Taxation sought to enforce in Connecticut, but taxpayer, in violation of Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. ? 10-42, did not file memorandum in opposition to Department's motion to strike special defenses, motion was granted.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback