 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ritchie v. Charolotte Hungerford Hosp., CV075002368,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD AT LITCHFIELD, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. ¿ 11-12 motion to reargue motion to revise was denied because law of the case doctrine did not have to be considered; it had not been argued. Executor could alternatively plead Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-555 wrongful death and loss of chance; court had not yet adopted theory of recovery as to loss of chance claim.
|
|||||
| Wininger v. Hong, CV085005876S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON AT NEW LONDON, July 10, 2008, Decided, July 10, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the allegations against a chief executive officer involved intentional, rather than negligent conduct, the former resident of a health care facility were not required to file a written and signed opinion of a similar health care provider under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-190a(c).
|
|||||
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. |
