 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Lyon v. Yeager, CV065000150,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, AT WILLIMANTIC, February 20, 2007, Decided , February 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctor's claim, that patient in malpractice case failed to comply with Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-190a because letter attached to good faith certificate was that of gynecological surgeon and doctor was surgical assistant specializing in family practice, was dependent on underlying facts not alleged in patient's pleadings. Motion to strike was denied.
|
|||||
| Parisi v. Johnsky, NNHCV054009374S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 20, 2007, Decided , February 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a teacher's opinions and assertions about the motives of the principal in reporting the teacher's alleged abuse of a student were insufficient to establish facts as would be admissible in evidence as required by Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 17-46, the principal was immune from liability pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17-101e(b).
|
|||||
| Ramin v. Ramin, SC 17316, SC 17319,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 20, 2007, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in failing to rule on wife's motions for contempt and sanctions based on husband's repeated failure to comply with trial court's discovery orders; extreme, compelling circumstances that would have allowed it to refuse to rule were not present and trial court thus abdicated obligation to decided matter properly presented to it.
|
|||||
| Scrivani v. Vallombroso, (AC 26315),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 20, 2007, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a court concluded that the Home Improvement Act violations were per se CUTPA violations, it was unclear whether it then determined if the Home Improvement Act violations, in conjunction with the other CUTPA violations, were the proximate cause of the loss. Thus, the matter had to be remanded.
|
|||||
| Small v. Going Forward, Inc., SC 17522,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 20, 2007, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-62(a)(9), imposing a "reasonable cost" limit on a "conveyance fee" a car dealer charged to process documents or for services related to closing a sale, imposed disclosure duties on a dealer, but did not regulate the fee's amount because, in context, it was solely definitional in nature, rather than regulatory or prohibitory.
|
|||||
| Solman v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 26698,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 20, 2007, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's habeas petition was dismissed because he did not demonstrate that the habeas court abused its discretion in denying the inmate's petition for certification to appeal. The inmate neither showed ineffective assistance of trial counsel, nor satisfied the good cause requirement for failing to present a due process claim.
|
|||||
| State v. Strich, AC 27371,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 20, 2007, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Removal of defendant from courtroom did not violate constitutional right to fair trial where trial court warned defendant many times he would be removed if he continued disrupt the proceedings, court did not order removal until beginning of prosecutor's closing argument, and thereafter defendant was able to hear proceedings in his holding cell.
|
|||||
| State v. Tutson, (AC 24066),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 20, 2007, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the State did not prosecute defendant under a theory of transferred intent where it read the murder statute to the jury, and the jury received no instructions on the doctrine, defendant failed to prove that a constitutional violation clearly existed and that it deprived him of a fair trial where he was convicted of attempted murder.
|
|||||
| Williams v. Abrams, X04CV054005263S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET, AT MIDDLETOWN, February 20, 2007, Decided , February 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Home inspector's intentional tort claims against real estate agent and agency were stricken. While the counts alleged that the inspector's injuries from toxic mold were due to agent's failure to tell him about the mold, there were no allegations of any specific intent to harm the inspector or of a purposeful invasion of the inspector's body.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
