 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Deval L., H12CP00007437A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, JUVENILE MATTERS AT HARTFORD, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Agency's motion to terminate the parental rights of a mother and father to their son was granted, as the parents had abandoned the child, and no further parent-child relationship existed, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-112(j), and termination was in the best interest of the child so he could be adopted by his foster parents.
|
|||||
| Jacko v. Jacko, FA950324208,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, January 31, 2006, Decided , January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since mother refused any restriction on request for overnight visitation with her children, who were in father's sole custody, and since she ran substance abuse rehabilitation center out of her home, including residential tenants, court ordered existing custody orders, which did not allow the mother overnight access, would remain in effect.
|
|||||
| Jannetty Racing Enters. v. Site Dev. Techs., LLC, CV054004820S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 31, 2006, Decided , January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Allegations that corporation breached contract did not show intent not to fulfill promise when it entered contract, so motion to strike count alleging CUTPA violation under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b(a) was granted; but manager's alleged inducement with knowledge that corporation could not fulfill promise was sufficient to allege CUTPA violation.
|
|||||
| Keeney v. Mystic Valley Hunt Club, Inc., (AC 25538), (AC 25716),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since it was not clear from her voir dire testimony that she knew the applicable standard of care and had the ability to evaluate the academy's conduct, and the witness had not trained young novice riders in more than 20 years, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in precluding the witness from testifying as an expert.
|
|||||
| Leak v. City of New Haven, CV055000438S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a pedestrian filed suit for injuries sustained when she slipped and fell on ice, the court entered a judgment in favor of the City of New Haven, Connecticut. The pedestrian presented no evidence that the City breached its statutory duty under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 13a-149 or that the conditions on the street constituted a defect.
|
|||||
| Leisure Resort Tech., Inc. v. Trading Cove Assocs., SC 17427,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted summary judgment to defendants as to plaintiff's claims alleging that a defendant misrepresented the value of a contract for operating a casino, and thus caused the company sell its interest for less than they were worth, as the company failed to prove the value of the contract at the time of the suit.
|
|||||
| Lin v. AMTRAK, SC 17346,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly declined to instruct the jury on the misled invitee doctrine, because the railroad trestle which the decedent was crossing when she was hit by a train was obviously dangerous, and could not have been mistaken for a public highway by the decedent.
|
|||||
| MD Drilling & Blasting, Inc. v. MLS Constr., LLC, (AC 26330),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if a corporation had attempted to revoke its offer, which required a partial payment for the balance owed on another job, since the company accepted the offer by tendering a check, it terminated any possible revocation. Thus, the oral contract was binding.
|
|||||
| McCann Real Equities Series XXII, LLC v. David McDermott Chevrolet, Inc., AC 26347,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted defendants' motion for a directed verdict, because an "as is" clause in the sales contract for the property in question absolved defendants of responsibility for environmental contamination, and defendants' actions in the sale of the property were not sufficient to support a violation of CUTPA.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
