|
|
| |
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 - April 4, 2002
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Ancona v. Ancona, CV010807012,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Hulse v. Armstrong, CV000437566,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Confession was voluntary where record failed to show that the inmate was subject to compelling pressures which undermined his will to resist and compelled him to speak where he otherwise would not have done so.
|
|
| |
McCormack v. McCormack, FA860252008S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Mjm Landscaping v. Lorent, CV990174738,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Nicholas v. Amica Mut. Ins. Co., CV94047942,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Policy language was clear: both parties had to consent to arbitration and son was excluded from UM coverage as he was operating motorcycle without reasonable belief that he was entitled to do so.
|
|
| |
Okwu v. Meo, CV010166397,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Connecticut statute protecting state employees from individual tort liability for acts that occurred in discharge of duties did not protect employee from liability for defamation, a malicious, intentional tort.
|
|
| |
Remuck v. Pilgrim Ins. Co., 559499,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, April 4, 2002, Decided , April 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The injured party did not assert, and offered no evidence demonstrating, that he had a usual place of business within the state of Connecticut. Therefore, he did not provide the court with a basis for jurisdiction over the insurance company.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback