|
|
| |
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!
|
| |
State Courts -
Connecticut - February 21, 2003
|
| |
Elem. Sch. Bldg. Comm. of Fairfield v. Placko, CV020398162S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Appeal by the elementary school building committee was dismissed because the committee failed to submit any evidence establishing that the town authorized it to sue in its attempt to complete the construction of the school.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Fort Trumbull Conservancy v. City of New London Planning & Zoning Comm'n, CV010560781,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The record supported the zoning commission's finding that the proposed office project did not create a possibility of unreasonable harm to the environment and was consistent with the municipal development plan.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Gradymac v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Comm'n, 564585,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Trial court denied motion to dismiss appeal of inland wetlands commission's decision to allow tree cutting as of right in wetlands and watercourse; LLC itself was not aggrieved but had representational standing to represent an aggrieved member.
|
|
| |
Hill v. Hill, FA980331783S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where a separation agreement excluded certain income from consideration for alimony modification, the court found that the husband's income had not increased enough to increase alimony. Child support, however, was increased.
|
|
| |
Lepore v. Goldman, CV010086509S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where a sales agreement was silent as to the need of a sales representative to return any excess advances received upon termination of her contract, she was not obligated to return those amounts.
|
|
| |
Provost v. Comm'r of Corr., File No. CV 00-0802785S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Confidentiality statute did not prohibit disclosure of children and family agency's records in all circumstances absent victim's consent. Court in habeas case overruled victim's objection and ordered records produced for in camera review.
|
|
| |
Santiago v. Warden, CV003136,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND, GEOGRAPHICAL AREA 19 AT ROCKVILLE, February 21, 2003, Decided , February 21, 2003, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Inmate's security risk group member and administrative segregation status were vacated where notice of hearing as to classification did not meet minimum procedural due process requirements, and reliability of confidential informant was not shown.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback