|
|
| |
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!
|
| |
State Courts -
Connecticut - February 14, 2003
|
| |
Northeast Conn. Econ. Alliance v. Atc P'Ship, X04CV940124630,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET AT NEW LONDON, February 14, 2003, Decided , February 14, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In determining the proper award of just compensation for condemned property, it was incumbent upon the trial court to determine the value by the proper valuation method and to consider the costs of environmental contamination and remediation.
|
|
| |
Plante v. State, 0561695,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 14, 2003, Decided , February 14, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Sovereign immunity barred student's claims against State of Connecticut and its employees who taught motorcycle class, as student was operating motorcycle at time of injury and employees' conduct was not reckless or outside scope of their employment.
|
|
| |
State v. Giraud, CR95482272,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 14, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Lengthy sentence imposed on convicted criminal for felony murder, first-degree robbery, second-degree larceny, and kidnapping was neither inappropriate nor disproportionate to offenses committed, and, thus, the sentence had to be affirmed.
|
|
| |
Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. v. Cormier Constr., CV010278215,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT MERIDEN, February 14, 2003, Decided , February 14, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where the apportionment complaint was filed by contractor, who was sued after original complaint was filed, time limitation on filing of apportionment complaint was based upon return date of original complaint, not complaint filed against contractor.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback