 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Pierre, SC 17227,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a felony murder trial, the trial court did not err by admitting a prior inconsistent statement, pursuant to Conn. Code Evid. R. 8-5 and 8-7, made by a former co-worker of defendant describing co-defendant's incriminating statements as the written statement was against co-defendant's penal interest, which established sufficient trustworthiness.
|
|||||
| State v. Preston, AC 24295,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While his appeal was pending, defendant pleaded guilty to the same criminal charges underlying his probation revocation. Because there was no longer an actual controversy between the parties, defendant's claims on appeal were moot. Therefore, the appellate court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| State v. Silva, (AC 25517),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since defendant brought her injured brother to a hospital and informed the officers of her intention, rather than interfering with the primary duty of the police, to assist an accident victim, defendant was carrying it out. Thus, she did not interfere with the officers in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-167a.
|
|||||
| Town of Groton Police Dep't v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, HHBCV054004903S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission erred when it required a town to disclose a police investigation report concerning allegations of child abuse; although the mother was the requester, there was no implied waiver of the confidentiality provision set forth in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-101k(a).
|
|||||
| Villa v. Pascarella, CV040489101S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 31, 2006, Decided , January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was awarded to landlord in plaintiff's suit for negligence and nuisance where there was no evidence that bonfires had been erected on premises at the inception of lease; plaintiff did not present any facts to create a genuine issue that landlord knew of tenant's intention to engage in activity of erecting and maintaining a bonfire.
|
|||||
| Vincenzi v. BET, Inc., CV040184682S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the effects of a night club's alleged negligence and the assailants' alleged negligence in regard to an assault on an injured person, who was a club patron, did not overlap completely, apportionment of liability could be determined by the fact finder; thus, an apportionment complaint was proper under Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 52-102b and 52-572h.
|
|||||
| Wagner & Wagner Auto Sales, Inc. v. Tarro, AC 26281,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Without factual basis for conclusion that foreign corporate landlord was not transacting business in state under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 33-920(a) or motion by tenants for articulation, record was inadequate to review claim that Conn. Gen. Stat. § 33-921 precluded suit; minor problems did not make premises untenantable to excuse rent obligation.
|
|||||
| Webster Trust v. Mardie Lane Homes, LLC, AC 26349,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 31, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court considered and ruled on a consolidation motion by a subsequent mortgage encumbrancer, and its decision to do so after a judgment of foreclosure was not an abuse of discretion; Since encumbrancer submitted no proof of property value despite two opportunities, trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to revalue property.
|
|||||
| Zdunczuk v. Wieckowski, HHBCV030523441S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, January 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff was entitled to the balance of $20,000 due to her under a general release executed by her in favor of defendant, her former domestic and business partner, because payments made by defendant to her prior to the release were in conjunction with their domestic relationship and not their business relationship.
|
|||||
| Zottola v. Miller, HHBCV054008311S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, January 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' motion to disqualify plaintiffs' counsel was granted, as the representation violated Conn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.9, because plaintiffs' attorney had previously represented defendant in her divorce, and was privy to information concerning defendant's finances and other information that could be used to defendant's disadvantage.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
