 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Begnoche v. Marcial, CV0110055S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, GEOGRAPHICAL AREA 11, AT DANIELSON, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Law presumed that counsel was competent until contrary evidence was introduced. Inmate failed to show that counsel's performance was deficient or that there was reasonable probability that result of case would have been different.
|
|||||
| Collins v. Lantern Point Ass'n, CV010381526S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Condominium unit owners were not liable for use of common areas solely on basis of their status as owners. Law of case doctrine did not prevent one judge from departing from interlocutory order of another judge in same case on question of law.
|
|||||
| Heck v. Heck, 110744,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, GEOGRAPHICAL AREA 11 AT DANIELSON, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not lack subject matter jurisdiction since notice to quit was timely served and reason given in notice complied with statute.
|
|||||
| In re Jeisean M., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUVENILE MATTERS, HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mother's parental rights were terminated after court found she failed to rehabilitate herself to degree necessary to care for child and progress she made was not enough to find she could be responsible parent within foreseeable period.
|
|||||
| Int'l Union, of Elevator Constructors, Local 91 v. State Elevator Work Examining Bd., CV010809162,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Union satisfied standing test for mandamus action where action would inure to members' benefit and it could adequately represent them. However, members had to be present to prove money damages.
|
|||||
| Iwanicki v. Jablonsky, CV010385509S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to dismiss prejudgment remedy was denied because application for prejudgment remedy did not commence suit, and therefore, there was no action pending before court for purposes of motion to dismiss.
|
|||||
| Noble v. White, CV970575751,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Clients failed to prove undue influence or duress by attorney in requiring installment fee agreement. No misrepresentation was shown.
|
|||||
| Verrico v. Dudek, CV010187006,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Contractor established probable cause as to validity of mechanic's lien. Owners failed to prove that contractor acted as general contractor on the job in violation of home improvement act.
|
|||||
| Yale New Haven Hosp. v. Vignola, CV000444787S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Once hospital, through its agent, elected to respond to patient's inquiry regarding insurance coverage, a duty to use due care in doing so arose. Allegations had to be accepted as true for purpose of motion to strike.
|
|||||
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. |
