 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cicero v. Town of Suffield, CV 970568244S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where plaintiff had not sustained his burden of proof that he only agreed to a settlement agreement because there was coercion such that his will was overborne, case was restored to the docket for the purpose of enforcing the agreement.
|
|||||
| D'Urso v. Lyon, CV 990426188S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, April 17, 2000, Decided , April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if it were found that the validating act failed with respect to the assignment of mortgage, defendants had an equitable interest in the property which they may have enforced.
|
|||||
| First Union Nat'l Bank v. Mase, CV 980084626,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, April 17, 2000, Decided , April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where equity did not require that defendant's counterclaim, which had been previously severed from main foreclosure action, be heard prior to entry of deficiency judgment, the court declined to entertain counterclaim.
|
|||||
| Greenleaf v. Greenleaf, FA 910395679S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, April 17, 2000, Decided , April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Modification of alimony was allowed where ex-wife's living expenses increased, her income had not increased, and a medical doctor opined that she would never return to gainful employment in the future.
|
|||||
| Podgwaite v. Grove, CV 990429286S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, April 17, 2000, Decided , April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff failed to prove adverse possession claim by clear and convincing evidence where evidence suggested her use was coupled with a license or consent of the owner.
|
|||||
| Smith-Walleck v. Woodbury Planning Comm'n, CV 990155988S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Failure to establish statutory or classical aggrievement deprived court of subject matter jurisdiction to hear appeal of planning and zoning commission decision granting developer's application to develop subdivision.
|
|||||
| Vasquez v. Warden, 551317,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, April 17, 2000, Decided , April 17, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
