|
|
| |
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 29, 2003
|
| |
|
| |
Maiorano v. New Haven Bd. of Zoning Appeals, CV020465649S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 29, 2003, Decided , January 29, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Zoning variance for roof which minimally exceeded height limitations was affirmed where applicant showed a unique hardship in the condition, age, and configuration of buildings, and hardship arose from circumstances beyond the applicant's control.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Morris v. Congdon, 562134,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, January 29, 2003, Decided , January 29, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Citizens' petition to have the board of selectmen warn of a special town meeting to eliminate the position of the town planner was not for a proper purpose and the board was legally justified in refusing to warn of the meeting.
|
|
| |
Mycoo v. O'Leary, CV010181894,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, January 29, 2003, Decided , January 29, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: There was a question of fact as to whether there had been a sufficient delivery of a promised gift of money to satisfy a prerequisite of a gift causa mortis from a deceased to his home health aide and as such, summary judgment was precluded.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Premier Capital v. Grossman, CV990334654S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, January 29, 2003, Decided , January 29, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In an action to determine the appropriate of stocks which were offered as collateral to secure a loan, and subsequently split, the trial court held that the appropriate date of valuation was the date of an unequivocal demand for payment of the debt.
|
|
| |
Proscino v. Oswald, CV01383787S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 29, 2003, Decided , January 29, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Notice to employer of third party tort action, which did not specifically state that right to bring action against third party tortfeasor would have been lost if recipient did not move to intervene within 30 days, was insufficient.
|
|
| |
Tbf Fin. Llc v. Grassilli, CV010805809,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 29, 2003, Decided , January 29, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Lessees were liable to assignee under lease agreement despite their claim that equipment failed. Lease was non-cancelable and indicated the obligation to make payments was irrevocable, absolute, and unconditional. Such clause was not unconscionable.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback