|
| |
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 Courts -
Connecticut - February 22, 2007
|
| |
Austin v. Austin, FSTFA030193530S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, February 22, 2007, Decided , February 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: As divorce judgment contained conflicting orders regarding a father's duty to provide medical insurance, he could not be held in contempt for failing to comply with the conflicting orders; father was no longer required to provide the insurance due to change in his financial circumstances and changes in the cost and availability of the insurance.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Doherty v. Danbury Hosp., CV065001040S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, February 22, 2007, Decided , February 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Germain v. Weinshel, CV030400820, CV030407347,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 22, 2007, Decided , February 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Matters involving the breakup of an accounting practice were resolved; while the parties disputed the allocation of distributions for 2001, they had in fact reached an agreement as to distributions, however, CPA three was shortchanged on 2002 distributions and was entitled to an additional distribution.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Tauck v. Tauck, FSTFA054004889S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 22, 2007, Decided , February 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Town of Hartford v. Conn. Resourses Recovery Auth., UWYCV040185580S(X02),
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 22, 2007, Decided , February 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Motion to dismiss was denied as waste management disposal program authority established under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-261 et seq. could be sued, and 70 towns had the power to attach its assets through a prejudgment remedy under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278a et seq., even though the authority was a quasi-public entity.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
