|
|
| |
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 Courts -
Connecticut - February 2, 2000
|
| |
Cadle Props. of Conn. v. City of West Haven, CV 960054392,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In an appeal concerning a 1991 valuation of property, the court weighed each party's appraisals and arrived at a valuation, which the parties were to take and compute the resulting changes to subsequent challenged lists.
|
|
| |
Casiano v. Warden, CV 990587847,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: A petition for a writ of habeas corpus regarding prison discipline was denied where the decision of prison administrators had basis in fact, particularly where the sanctions were commensurate with the violation.
|
|
| |
Dollard v. Orange Bd. of Educ., CV 99067338,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Plaintiff's intentional infliction of emotional distress claim was dismissed because she failed to allege defendant's commission of extreme and outrageous conduct.
|
|
| |
Dovenmuehle v. Brucoli, CV 990173479S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because payment was traditional defense to foreclosure, the court refused to strike that special defense in plaintiff's foreclosure action; failure to state a claim defense was stricken because it was not a recognized defense.
|
|
| |
Hackett v. Koellhoffer, FA 000337946S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Plaintiff mother was awarded sole custody of the parties' minor child, and defendant father was awarded visitation and ordered to pay child support.
|
|
| |
Herb Holden Trucking v. Vinco Inc., CV 940542455S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Subcontractor's loss of productivity claims against general contractor were barred by failure to comply with contractual claim provisions and by releases; claims regarding change orders and payment retainage were not barred.
|
|
| |
Johnson v. Johnson, CV 950108399,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Upholding the validity of the separation agreement provision that a child was to decide whether to apply for tribal membership did not interfere with a Native American tribe's exclusive right to determine who may be a member.
|
|
| |
Lamura v. Lamura, FA 980168443S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Morris v. Brookside Commons, Ltd. P'ship, CV 980581120S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 2, 2000, Decided , February 2, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Plaintiffs failed to allege a substantial injury as a result of an unfair or deceptive trade practice by defendant in the conduct of its business. Claims under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act were stricken.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|