 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bissonnette v. Kotsaftis, CV010162187,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 7, 2002, Decided , February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because employee was not obligated to send statutory notice to employer's counsel, his counsel did not violate professional conduct rules by doing so.
|
|||||
| Brodeur v. Brodeur, FA960712941,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An ex-husband's motion to modify his alimony obligation was denied, because the husband's loss of a license and the subsequent loss of his job was caused by the husband's intentional violation of federal securities regulations.
|
|||||
| Crow v. Crow, FA000180231S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 7, 2002, Decided , February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment dissolving marriage on ground of irretrievable breakdown was entered where there was basic difference in each party's approach to managing of family finances, but causes of breakdown remained somewhat obscure.
|
|||||
| Embalmers' Supply Co. v. Giannitti, CV010183763,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 7, 2002, Decided , February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to dismiss action claiming vexatious litigation was denied where critical issue was whether there was probable cause for the institution of the previous action, which was not an issue properly resolved on a motion to dismiss.
|
|||||
| Fialho v. Guglielmo, CV990268224S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT MERIDEN, February 7, 2002, Decided , February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Fulk v. Lee, CV970063572,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND, AT ROCKVILLE, February 7, 2002, Decided , February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Realtors' refusal to rent apartment to renter because she was unemployed, even though she had assistance benefits sufficient to cover rent, violated statutory prohibition of refusal to rent based on lawful source of income.
|
|||||
| Jenkins v. State, CV010450261,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court denied defendant's petition to compel State of Connecticut to provide names and addresses of sheriffs and jurors involved in his homicide trial as well as the address of investigator who had worked for public defender's office.
|
|||||
| Madden v. Ragaglia, FA010066524S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, AT PUTNAM, February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court agreed that the accused persons' requests were overly broad, but the proper method to challenge the legal sufficiency of the complaint was to make a motion to strike prior to trial. The court disagreed that it lacked jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Mayo v. Yale Univ., CV000440145S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Without agreement to arbitrate, there was to be no arbitration. Words used by employee handbook relating to grievance procedure were not words of compulsion, but rather suggested option of accepting grievance procedure or litigating.
|
|||||
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. |
