 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Gracewski, (AC 19619),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence that child died from shaken-baby syndrome and was healthy when left in defendant's care supported convictions for manslaughter and risk of injury to a child. Judge's questioning of witness did not deprive defendant of fair trial.
|
|||||
| State v. Mooney, (AC 20636),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court affirmed defendant's felony murder, robbery, burglary, assault, and kidnapping convictions. The convictions based on reckless conduct were not inconsistent with the ones based on intentional conduct. The jury instructions were proper.
|
|||||
| State v. Nunes, (AC 18096),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant drugged victim, causing her to be dizzy and nauseous, where victim's hospital tests proved negative and experts could not link victim's symptoms to drugs.
|
|||||
| State v. Rivera, (AC 18695),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for conspiracy to commit kidnapping in first degree were affirmed. Prosecutor's admittedly improper comments during rebuttal stage of closing arguments were not so prejudicial that they deprived defendant of fair trial.
|
|||||
| State v. Rodriguez, (AC 19654),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where trial court tried to elicit examples of defense counsel's inadequate preparation, yet defendant did not provide factual support for allegations, defendant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel.
|
|||||
| State v. Weiner, (AC 18871),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sexual assault, unlawful restraint, and risk of injury to a child convictions were affirmed. Unlawful restraint conviction was not inconsistent with acquittal for first degree sexual assault. New evidence would not have altered trial's outcome.
|
|||||
| Tavarozzi v. Emmanuel, CV990593863,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 13, 2001, Decided , February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court ordered that real estate sellers were to specifically perform their obligation to sell to buyers. The sellers could not use the attorney review clause in good faith to avoid the intent of the contract to sell.
|
|||||
| Town of Southington v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., (AC 18088),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 13, 2001, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The appellate court remanded plaintiff's case to the trial court for consideration of whether plaintiff was precluded from calling the bond, as it had become, in effect, a successor developer of the subdivision.
|
|||||
| Wollschlager v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., CV990268492S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT MERIDEN, February 13, 2001, Decided , February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where plaintiff was living with his in-laws and driving his wife's car at the time of an accident and he was not a liability insured when he drove a car that did not belong to in-laws, he was not covered under their underinsured motorist coverage.
|
|||||
| Zemantic v. Zemantic, FA9763662,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND, AT ROCKVILLE, February 13, 2001, Decided , February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A former husband's child support obligation for his children of joint custody was ordered increased due to his resumption of employment and due to no change in the parties' visitation schedule.
|
|||||
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. |
