 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Climis v. City of Ansonia Zoning Bd. of Appeals, CV054001946S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT DERBY, February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal of zoning board of appeals' (ZBA) ruling on zoning violations was dismissed because the appeal was not filed within 15 days of the publication of the ZBA opinion, as required by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-8(b) and service of process on the individual ZBA members did not comply with § 8-8(f)(2); thus, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Collins v. Anthem Health Plans, Inc., X06CV990156198S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET AT WATERBURY, February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When medical practice groups, not individual physicians, had contracted with defendant to provide medical services to its insureds, the physicians lacked standing to sue defendant. The groups were better suited to remedy the alleged harm, and the harm suffered by the physicians was incidental or derivative of the alleged harm to the groups.
|
|||||
| Delgado v. City of New Haven, CV054007851S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiffs overcame governmental immunity through "identifiable person/imminent harm" exception, as they alleged minor was injured on three occasions on school grounds and defendants did not take action despite previous complaints. Plaintiffs raised Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-557n at oral argument, sufficiently asserting it as basis for city liability.
|
|||||
| Early v. Allen, CV065003421,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a city police officer was injured by a car driven by a fellow police officer, he did not have a cause of action against the city under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-465 because he was eligible for workers' compensation or under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-101a because it did not provide an injured person an independent cause of action against a municipality.
|
|||||
| Estate of Maroni v. Bobcat of Connecticut, Inc., CV0504012196,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A lessor of construction equipment was considered a "product seller" under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-572m for the purposes of a products liability action because even though the lease was to a sister corporation, such a lease was considered within the stream of commerce as the two corporations were separate legal entities.
|
|||||
| Green v. Norbert, CV0605004859S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court denied healthcare providers' motion to dismiss patient's medical malpractice action for patient's failure to file written opinion of expert witness as required by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-190a; whether to dismiss action was discretionary since filing of written opinion was not jurisdictional, and opinion had been obtained but not filed.
|
|||||
| In re Emerald C., H12CP03009196A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, JUVENILE MATTERS AT HARTFORD, February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The parental rights of a mother and father to a young girl where terminated in a case wherein the Department of Children and Families established the seven statutory factors of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-112 by clear and convincing evidence and the parents were found unable or unwilling to reunify due to their opposition and substance abuse.
|
|||||
| Jessen v. E. Conn. Foot Specialists, P.C., 4003809,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After the pleadings in a case were closed and a jury claim was filed, the superior court judge found that all further pretrial matters, including any motion for summary judgment, could be referred to a judge trial referee for hearing and decision because the express mandate for consent contained in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-434(a)(1) did not apply.
|
|||||
| Langyel v. Mattia, DBDFA064006514S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, February 7, 2007, Decided , February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because of the history of the matter in the juvenile court, which included action on the issues of custody and visitation within the past year and the involvement of the Department of Children and Families, the parties and child were best served by having the matter transferred to the juvenile court for consideration of the mother's application.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
