 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Garthwaite v. Lynch, CV 950146452,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant search firm associate recovered $ 7,500 on counterclaim from plaintiff former associate, because said amount was paid by defendant to the lessor on a lease both had signed. Trial referee's recommendation accepted.
|
|||||
| Lewis v. Bourdon Forge Co., CV 990089115,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to strike was granted, as plaintiff failed to sufficiently establish right to workers' compensation benefits. Workers' Compensation Act exclusivity provision did not preclude intentional misconduct claim.
|
|||||
| McDougall v. Lanzetta, FA 880085797S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, FAMILY SUPPORT MAGISTRATE DIVISION, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although child support settlement was unmodifiable by its terms, child was not represented by counsel when it was negotiated; thus, it could not bind her. Significant change in circumstances warranted modifying support obligation.
|
|||||
| Ortiz v. Bridgeport Hosp., 547104,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An apportionment complaint against a third party was dismissed because a 120-day service requirement was strictly construed and an indemnification complaint was not dismissed where defendant did not raise it in the motion.
|
|||||
| Pequonnock Yacht Club v. City of Bridgeport, CV 980355031S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Yacht club was not required to show normal grounds for injunction against city's eminent domain condemnation, and factual issue of necessity for the condemnation was properly raised although its illegality was unsupported.
|
|||||
| Peszynski v. Hartford Ins. Co., CV 9781511,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inability of fire investigators to determine cause of a residential fire was insufficient basis for a finding of arson.
|
|||||
| Schmid v. Town of Darien, CV 970157501S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to dismiss denied because plaintiff's personal injury claim was pursuant to statute which abrogated sovereign immunity, she gave proper notice, and issue of whether something was a defect was question of fact for jury.
|
|||||
| State v. Deangelo, CR 970108766S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 24, 2000, Decided , February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was not guilty because the state was unable to establish defendant's sanity beyond a reasonable doubt and thus did not sustain its burden of proof.
|
|||||
| Thomaston Sav. Bank v. Zoning Comm'n of Waterbury, CV 990151649S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a majority of zoning commission did not exist at special meeting to consider bank's zone change request, commission did not render valid decision at meeting. However, bank's application was not automatically approved.
|
|||||
| Town of Cornwall v. Cornwall Library Ass'n, CV 990081053S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, February 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctrine of approximation allowed defendant, who in a charitable trust received property to maintain library, to transfer interest to town as property was no longer suitable and there was no gift-over or reversionary clause.
|
|||||
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. |
