 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Shabazian v. Univ. of Conn., CV010809785S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 4, 2002, Decided , February 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Administrator, who sued State for medical malpractice at State university, properly served university by leaving copy of proper documents with assistant state attorney general. Thus, trial court had subject matter jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Shuckra v. Blanchette, CV010508168S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 4, 2002, Decided , February 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to strike defendants' special defenses was denied; the special defenses did not fit within a statutory prohibition, as they were directed in each instance at the entire complaint.
|
|||||
| Shuckra v. Keefe Supply Co., CV010509454S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 4, 2002, Decided , February 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctrine of sovereign immunity barred claims against deputy commissioner in suit by inmate who alleged that deputy commissioner entered into contracts to purchase defective products for use by inmates that caused inmate injury.
|
|||||
| Young v. City of Shelton, CV000072239S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 4, 2002, Decided , February 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although 120-day time limit for service of apportionment complaint that was filed in negligence action was mandatory, apportionment action was saved by saving statute because process was served within 15 days of its delivery to state marshal.
|
|||||
| Zichichi v. Adm'r, CV000444408,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The employee's actions of writing company checks to himself, disregarding the company's financial status, and ignoring company instructions constituted willful misconduct making him ineligible for unemployment benefits.
|
|||||
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. |
