 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Schultz v. Berkowsky, CV020188608S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, February 18, 2004, Decided , February 18, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was entered in favor of neighbors in property owners' action seeking title to a strip of land pursuant to adverse possession; the owners failed to show that they had adversely possessed the land for the required period of time.
|
|||||
| State v. Brown, CR0284500T,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, GEOGRAPHICAL AREA 11 AT DANIELSON, February 18, 2004, Decided , February 18, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: At some point within a missing child matrix, emergency circumstances and developments clearly outweighed defendant's expectations, if any, of privacy. Thus, all evidence found at the scene of the discovery of the child's body was admissible.
|
|||||
| State v. Ortiz, CR020557413,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 18, 2004, Decided , February 18, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to suppress evidence was denied because entry into a bathroom in defendant's apartment by police was justified under the emergency doctrine, as the police were responding to a burglar alarm in the apartment.
|
|||||
| Werner v. Richardson, CV020819120,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 18, 2004, Decided , February 18, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an enforceable contract was found in a joint venture for operation of a jewelry store by the parties, there could be no award for unjust enrichment, which was an equitable remedy where no contract was found.
|
|||||
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. |
