 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Administrative & Residual Emples. Union v. State Dep't of Revenue Servs., CV 990589921S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where submission was unrestricted, arbitrator need not have decided issue in accordance with law or have given preclusive effect to prior arbitrator's decision, and because award conformed to submission it was confirmed.
|
|||||
| Boulware v. Warden, CV 980576582,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 23, 2000, Decided , February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Habeas petition denied because defendant failed to prove, in light of plea bargain, that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and because court could not credit defendant's testimony.
|
|||||
| Calabrese v. Citizens Ins. Co., CV 970138385,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 23, 2000, Decided , February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In action for insurance coverage, insurance contract was ambiguous where language in contract was not adequately defined; summary judgment denied where there were genuine issues of material fact remaining.
|
|||||
| Clarke v. Estate of Morton, CV 980058562S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM, AT PUTNAM, February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Action was not time-barred; plaintiffs delivered process to the sheriff, but she died before completing service, and these circumstances satisfied the accidental failure of suit statute.
|
|||||
| D.A.N. Joint Venture v. Salinardi, 403946,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 23, 2000, Decided , February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court overruled plaintiff's objections to defendants' amended answer, holding the relevant practice rule time limit was directory rather than mandatory.
|
|||||
| Delvecchio v. Dayton Hudson Corp., 430408,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Connecticut court could not assert personal jurisdiction over nonresident corporation that did not entice Connecticut residents to leave state to visit or do business with it through its advertising.
|
|||||
| Doe v. Tvcca, X04CV 930115438S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, February 23, 2000, Decided , February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment and damage award in parents and children's favor upheld in suit against town and employee for employee's sexual assault on children because evidence supported finding of abuse and children required future counseling.
|
|||||
| Faust v. Connecticut Junior Republic Ass'n, CV 990336698S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, February 23, 2000, Decided , February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's breach of contract claim did not fall within exceptions to general rule rejecting contract claims challenging quality of education programs. Therefore, the plaintiff failed to allege a breach of contract action.
|
|||||
| Ford v. Ford, FA 990169979S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 23, 2000, Decided , February 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
