 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bloomdahl v. Wilf, FA040198671,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, REGIONAL FAMILY TRIAL DOCKET AT MIDDLETOWN, February 5, 2007, Decided , February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dissolution of marriage action, the marriage was found to have broken down irretrievably and there was no reasonable prospect of reconciliation. After considering the statutory criteria, including Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-84 as to support of minor children, and evidence, orders were entered as to custody and alimony, among other issues.
|
|||||
| Glaves v. Holroyd, CV054003502S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 5, 2007, Decided , February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court found for defendants in plaintiffs' action to extinguish easement; plaintiffs had to establish they obstructed through adverse acts defendants' use and enjoyment of easement for 15-year period, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47-37, until sometime in 2004, but defendants began to enjoy and use easement almost immediately upon moving to property in 2002.
|
|||||
| Phillips v. Phillips, FA054103034S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, February 5, 2007, Decided , February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the wife had a net weekly income of $ 1,291.76 and her liabilities totaled $ 14,527, and the husband, who had his own tree servicing business, had a net weekly income of $ 203.17, the wife was to pay the husband $ 50 alimony per week for three years.
|
|||||
| Piela v. Carr, FA074005376,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, AT PUTNAM, February 5, 2007, Decided , February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a father had concerns about the mother's alleged alcohol abuse, the evidence presented did not preclude the mother's overnight visitation/access with her son; however, pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-56, and Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. §§ 25-3, 25-4, conditions were established on the visitation.
|
|||||
| Seneca One, LLC v. Hartford Life Ins. Co., CV064007406S, Opinion No.: 97064,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Application of the applicant for transfer of some structured settlement payments from the structured settlement payee to the applicant was approved; pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-225i, the transfer was in the best interest of structured settlement payee, taking into account welfare and support of the structured settlement payee's dependents.
|
|||||
| Seracino v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, Inc., CV065004767, Opinion No.: 97061,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 5, 2007, Decided , February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to dismiss filed by defendants was granted as second suit filed by employee was barred under prior pending action doctrine, even though different theories of liability were advanced. Prayers for relief sought to accomplish same objectives, and both actions arose out of same alleged representations made to employee by supervisor.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
