 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| AFSCME, Local 1565 v. Dep't of Corr., AC 28320,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was affirmed as arbitrator's inference of guilt from grievant's accelerated rehabilitation acceptance for drug charges under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 54-56e did not manifest egregious application of law under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-418(a)(4) that was capable of being perceived as error by average person qualified to serve as arbitrator.
|
|||||
| Bailey v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 28288,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal of habeas petitioner, who alleged ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, was dismissed as petitioner established what occurred during criminal trial and what claims were raised on direct appeal, but he did nothing more than argue before habeas court that appellate counsel might have handled appeal differently.
|
|||||
| Comm'r of Envtl. Prot. v. Mellon, SC 17945,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Crews v. Crews, AC 26996,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in not enforcing an antenuptial agreement as, inter alia, there was no evidence parties' financial circumstances were anything other than what they contemplated when signing agreement; assets of both parties had increased over time. Order that husband maintain $ 1.5 million life insurance policy was permissible and not excessive.
|
|||||
| Finan v. Finan, AC 28319,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Coby C., AC 28530,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of mother's parental rights for failure to achieve sufficient personal rehabilitation so as to allow her to assume responsible position in child's life was upheld as, inter alia, mother failed to cooperate with home visits, to submit to counseling and substance abuse assessment, and to secure and maintain adequate housing and income.
|
|||||
| Konefal v. Konefal, AC 28253,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was affirmed in judgment lien foreclosure action as brother two did not present adequate record under Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. App. Ct. ¿ 60-5 to support claim that brother one's counsel knew that brother two was incompetent as of 2001 civil assault trial, yet failed to inform court about brother two's condition.
|
|||||
| LaCroix v. Glens Falls Ins. Co., AC 28447,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In UIM damages case, judgment was affirmed as insurer's doctor specified three other doctors whose reports he examined, and did not mention insured's physicians, who assigned permanency ratings to insured for preexisting conditions. Insured should have known that earlier disability ratings for same body parts would be issue.
|
|||||
| Natarajan v. Natarajan, AC 28243,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Divorce judgment was affirmed as admission of financial summary was not abuse of discretion since prior counsel's administrative assistant testified that wife received underlying documents, summary was on two lists of exhibits to be offered at trial, summary complied with Conn. Code Evid. R. 10-5, and wife was given two hours to review it.
|
|||||
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. |
