 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Borrelli v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Middletown, AC 27222,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was no livery stable, Middletown, Conn., Zoning Regulations ¿ 61.01.27, which enumerated the permitted recreational use of livery stable in commercial zones, was not applicable to the court's analysis. Also, the property fell within the definition of agriculture.
|
|||||
| Curcio v. Bax, AC 28065,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was properly rendered for sellers in a purchaser's action seeking damages under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 49-8(c) and a release of the security on a promissory note. The purchaser was not entitled to a credit against the purchase price of stock under the parties' agreement, and he had not tendered the amount necessary to render the note paid.
|
|||||
| Gibbons v. Historic Dist. Comm'n, SC 17846,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Historic district commission erred in denying property owner's application to move outbuilding, attach it to main house, and make additional alterations, as commission's decision was not based on substantial evidence. Among other things, there was no objective determination outbuilding had historic significance of its own or in relation to harbor.
|
|||||
| Jarrett v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 28297,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it was clear from the record that the habeas court understood that the delay had occurred due to counsel, but afforded the aspect of the Barker factors the appropriate weight because, in fact, defendant suffered no prejudice, the judgment of the habeas court was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Jim's Auto Body v. Comm'r of Motor Vehicles, SC 17758,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurance company was a customer under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 14-63, as insurance company was obligated under terms of insurance policy to pay for cost of licensee's repairs to vehicle and thus, insurance company did not need to have privity of contract. Substantial evidence supported finding body shop violated Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿¿ 14-65g, 65i, and 65j.
|
|||||
| Mastroianni v. Fairfield County Paving, LLC, AC 26732,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the tenants agreed to make certain improvements in exchange for the right to lease the premises, and the tenants occupied the premises for a five month period without paying rent or making improvements, the lessor was entitled to recover the reasonable value of the use and occupancy of the premises under Conn. Gen. Stat. 47a-35a.
|
|||||
| State v. Abreu, AC 28450,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant could not ask the jury to infer from the victim's alleged status as a drug dealer that the victim was armed and about to use deadly physical force against him and he could not rely on that improper inference as justification for killing the victim in self-defense, that evidence was properly excluded.
|
|||||
| State v. Gonzalez, AC 27820,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Murder conviction was upheld as, inter alia, claim of failure to instruct jury on jailhouse informant testimony was not of constitutional magnitude and thus, failed to satisfy second prong of Golding; alleged improper admission of hearsay was not abuse of discretion as it was not harmful; and consciousness of guilt instruction was correct in law.
|
|||||
| State v. John M., SC 17398,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Any error arising from exclusion of testimony about second ex-wife's experiences as sexual abuse victim was harmless, as ruling had no bearing on outcome given daughter's graphic and detailed testimony about eight-year period of sexual abuse. Exclusion of evidence of hostility by ex-wife was not error, as hostility could be inferred from evidence.
|
|||||
| State v. Williams, AC 26901,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 11, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the nolles were entered after more than 13 months had elapsed under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 54-142a(c), and the erasure statute expunged any record of defendant's arrest and the statute of limitations had run, the same result would have been obtained had the court dismissed the charges. Thus, the claim was moot.
|
|||||
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. |
