 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Isgut v. State Med. Examining Bd., CV020514637S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Determination of medical examining board that doctor failed to meet standard of care with respect to care and treatment of patient on Ritalin and failed to monitor patient was upheld since board was entitled to make determination based on expertise.
|
|||||
| KLM Indus. v. Tylutki, (AC 22308),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 11, 2003, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court was allowed to pierce corporate veil only under exceptional circumstances. Judgment of personal liability against corporation president was reversed where, inter alia, president held no shares and treated the corporation as distinct entity.
|
|||||
| Kevalis v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., CV020079667S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, GEOGRAPHICAL AREA 5 AT DERBY, February 11, 2003, Decided , February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court granted insurer's motion to strike claims that insurer violated Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act by failing to pay UM claims, but denied motion to strike claims for breach of contract.
|
|||||
| Koch v. Stop & Shop Co., CV020561277S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 11, 2003, Decided , February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee's motion to strike as legally insufficient her employer's claims against her for unjust enrichment, conversion, and money had and received had to do more than simply contest the claims' factual bases.
|
|||||
| Losacano v. Town of Plainfield, CV010067834S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, AT PUTNAM, February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a civil wrongful death action related to only one child of an administratrix, a town could not obtain a deposition or disclosure of a child welfare agency's records relating to the administratrix's other children.
|
|||||
| Lunn v. Hussey, CV010085525,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 11, 2003, Decided , February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Client's allegations that the painter breached his contract with clients and per se violated CUTPA by virtue of a violation of the Connecticut Home Improvement Act were sufficient to survive the painter's motion to strike. CUTPA count was stricken.
|
|||||
| Marcewicz v. Marcewicz, FA010344311S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, REGIONAL FAMILY TRIAL DOCKET AT DANBURY, February 11, 2003, Decided , February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The parties' marriage was dissolved on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown. The parties were to share joint legal custody of the child with the wife's residence being the primary residence. Both parents were ordered to attend therapy.
|
|||||
| Mohican Valley Concrete Corp. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, (AC 21794),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 11, 2003, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly upheld the decision of the board in regard to the car dealership. However, it erred in remanding the matter as it should have searched the record to ascertain whether the board's decision had sufficient evidentiary support.
|
|||||
| Newman v. Seymour, CV020088133S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 11, 2003, Decided , February 11, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neighbor's counterclaim was stricken where his allegations that landowners cut their own trees basically repeated special defense and was not proper basis for counterclaim, and remaining allegations did not arise out of same transaction as complaint.
|
|||||
| Pelletier v. Sordoni/Skanska Constr. Co., (SC 16743), (SC 16747),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 11, 2003, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Exceptions to rule that contractors are not liable for torts committed by subcontractors did not apply to subcontractor's employee injured in work-related accident, and trial court properly dismissed employee's action against general contractor.
|
|||||
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. |
