 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brennan v. State Dmv, CV010509339S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court sustained hearing officer's ruling that treatment motorist received from doctor and psychiatric social worker did not qualify motorist for waiver of requirement that he complete substance abuse program before getting license reinstated.
|
|||||
| Capitol Light & Supply Co. v. Maklari Elec. Corp., CV990592027,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion amend their pleadings was denied; the motion to amend was filed after the deadline for such motions imposed by the court, and the court found no compelling justification not to enforce the amendment deadline.
|
|||||
| City of Bridgeport v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., CV010509057S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Regulation requiring that agency set up hearing within 30 days of appeal by municipality was directory, not mandatory, and was not jurisdictional. Even if provision was mandatory, 30-day deadline was waived by city.
|
|||||
| Diner v. City of Waterbury, CV990152919S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Building was not part of bankruptcy estate either when third party filed bankruptcy or when corporation filed its complaint. Corporation had standing to bring declaratory judgment action regarding mortgage held by city on building.
|
|||||
| In re Ashley M., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, CHILD PROTECTION SESSION AT MIDDLETOWN, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father created conditions whereby termination was sought and failed to avail himself of reunification services; he could not meet child's needs. Placement with paternal relatives was not appropriate.
|
|||||
| Kitzman v. Pac. Indem. Co., CV010449673S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was denied where issues existed as to whether insurer promptly investigated, whether insurer was prejudiced by insured's refusal to withdraw suit or submit to examination under oath, and whether substantial compliance existed.
|
|||||
| Martanis v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., CV990065733S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insured's damages had to be apportioned between joint tortfeasors. Policy set-off language applied to jury award and not to policy limits. Question of fact existed as to whether there were one or two accidents.
|
|||||
| Matthiessen v. Vanech, CV960154373S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 8, 2002, Decided , February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Montanaro v. Gaf Materials Corp., CV01380478S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 8, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Owner's allegations that manufacturer produced shingles that were defective satisfied pleading requirements of statutory products liability claim, which was his exclusive remedy.
|
|||||
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. |
