 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Jewish Home for the Elderly v. Cantore, CV960155519S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, February 24, 2004, Decided , February 24, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Levandoski v. Cone, (SC 16843),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 24, 2004, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The "firefighter's rule" did not apply to a tortfeasor who was neither an owner nor a person in control of the premises. It was also reasonably foreseeable that the police officer could have been injured in pursuing the fleeing tortfeasor.
|
|||||
| Michaelis v. Michaelis, (AC 23450),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 24, 2004, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where there was an evidentiary basis for the trial court's factual determinations and it considered all relevant criteria in fashioning its orders, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in valuing the parties' financial assets.
|
|||||
| Mulla v. Maguire, CV980077483S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 24, 2004, Decided , February 24, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court determined that a right of way had not been extinguished by nonuse, and that the width of the right of way was no more than eight feet, based on the use of the right of way by the prior owner as a means of access to a cabin.
|
|||||
| New Milford Bank & Trust Co. v. Janson, CV030090791S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 24, 2004, Decided , February 24, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a foreclosure action, a bank adequately showed that it was the owner of the mortgage being foreclosed, as it showed it owned the bank which previously owned the mortgage, so summary judgment was appropriate.
|
|||||
| Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Solla, CV030521139S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 24, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Daley, (AC 23567),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 24, 2004, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court refused to review denial of defendant's motion to withdraw nolo contendere plea, made nine months after sentencing, as defendant did not show legislative authorization allowing plea withdrawal and did not seek review under Golding.
|
|||||
| State v. Peeler, (SC 16571),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 24, 2004, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In defendant's trial for conspiracy to commit murder, trial court properly admitted coconspirator's statements intended to fabricate an alibi and to discourage a witness from coming forward, and statements made to a third-party over the telephone.
|
|||||
| State v. Reyes, (AC 23213),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 24, 2004, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of a motion to suppress statements defendant made to police was not error, as the statements were not given involuntarily, and there was no abuse of discretion in disallowing evidence proffered to contradict a detective's testimony.
|
|||||
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. |
