 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown v. Team Fleet Servs. Corp., CV 980085750S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, December 9, 1999, Decided , December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In car accident case, motion for summary judgment by car-leasing company was denied since issue of fact existed on whether emergency situation arose that was beyond the control of both the authorized and unauthorized driver.
|
|||||
| Doctors Assocs. v. Subway Franchisee Advertising Trust Fund, CV 99067142,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, December 9, 1999, Decided , December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff, who had been a party to a prior dispute regarding defendant's board elections, but who failed to contest the election procedures and could not prove it would suffer irreparable harm, could not enjoin elections.
|
|||||
| Hale v. Abernathy, CV 980087487,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, December 9, 1999, Decided , December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was improper because there was a genuine and material issue of fact as to whether the circumstances that caused the vehicle to be involved in a collision arose from an emergency situation.
|
|||||
| Jorgo v. Jorgo, FA 920127712S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Husband's support obligation was reduced to $ 1 per year due to substantial change in circumstances since child attained majority, wife's income increased, and husband's earning capacity was reduced without fault on his part.
|
|||||
| Leblond v. Gotta, CV 990068860S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND, AT ROCKVILLE, December 9, 1999, Decided , December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Moore v. Commissioner, CV 980492655S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT NEW BRITAIN, December 9, 1999, Decided , December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Administrative appeal of denial of Medicaid benefits was dismissed, because insurance policies were not inaccessible to applicant, benefits did not need to be retroactively granted, and agency's determination was correct.
|
|||||
| Powell v. Caldwell, CV 970157876S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Robertson v. Delsanto, CV 980578887,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, December 9, 1999, Decided , December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State had no immunity for personal injury actions arising out of employee operation of motor vehicle when driver was employee subject to control of state, but no liability for a permissive user of state vehicle.
|
|||||
| Robinson v. Robinson, FA 960711330S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, December 9, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When the expectation was that plaintiff's and defendant's minor son would attend private school and the parents could afford such education, sufficient justification existed for an order to pay private school expenses.
|
|||||
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. |
