 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bernhard Thomas Bldg. Sys., LLC v. Dunican, SC 17899,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the language of the prejudgment remedy statutes, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278a et seq., made it clear that proceedings for prejudgment remedy applications and civil actions were separate and distinct, the employer could not base its claim for vexatious litigation on the employee's filing of an unsuccessful prejudgment remedy application.
|
|||||
| Bryn v. Bryn, AC 27765,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a father failed to prove an lack of an adequate legal remedy and irreparable harm in support of their request for an injunction, the superior court did not abuse its discretion in denying them injunctive relief.
|
|||||
| Council v. Comm'r of Corr., SC 18015, SC 18016,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's claim habeas court incorrectly found no due process violation for trial court's failure to canvass inmate on "no arrest" condition in plea agreement and denial of opportunity to challenge arrest before enforcing condition was procedurally defaulted. Commissioner's challenge to ineffective assistance finding was not preserved for review.
|
|||||
| Farhad Moasser v. Becker, AC 27894,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: No reason was shown why Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-249 would not authorize the attorney's fee award requested by the creditor, were the court to have concluded the creditor were so entitled upon a balancing of the equities. Thus, the matter had to be remanded for a redetermination.
|
|||||
| Hous. Auth. of W. Haven v. CB Alexander Real Estate, LLC, AC 28528,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Use of income capitalization method of valuing owners' condominium units seized in eminent domain action was not clearly erroneous; that valuation represented just compensation under Conn. Const. art. I, § 11, as housing authority did not offer another valuation method and trial court had substantial discretion to accept or reject valuation method.
|
|||||
| Parrott v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 27573,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of petition for certification to appeal denial of habeas petition was upheld, as inmate failed to show that any prejudice resulted from trial counsel's failure to call an alibi witness who would have provided cumulative testimony and inmate failed to prove prejudice from failure to file motion to suppress victim's identification testimony.
|
|||||
| Pelletier v. Sordoni/Skanska Constr. Co., SC 17775,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Failure of general contractor, as permit applicant, to inspect welds was not negligence per se under Conn. Basic Bldg. Code § 1307; contractor did not have a nondelegable duty to a subcontractor's employee to inspect welds and Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 29-254a, -263, -265, and -267 imposed no specific duty on a permit applicant.
|
|||||
| State v. Aviles, AC 28454,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence presented at probable cause hearing warranted finding that defendant intended to kill and, thus, could be tried on Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a(a) murder charge; it showed victim cheated defendant in a drug deal, that defendant retrieved a gun, and that defendant fired shots into door after victim slammed it in defendant's face.
|
|||||
| State v. Cote, SC 18014,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Convictions relating to storage and disposal of hazardous waste under Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 22a-131a(b) and 53a-48(a) were reversed as jury was improperly charged as to elements of "disposal" and "storage" by using definitions in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C.S. § 6901 et seq., rather than Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-115.
|
|||||
| State v. Darrow, AC 28864,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 22, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for murder under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a was reversed, as trial court erroneously declined to instruct jury on self-defense despite fact evidence defendant killed victim in his home during altercation boosted defendant over the evidentiary threshold and weighing credibility of competing confessions was in jury's exclusive province.
|
|||||
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. |
