 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Kelly F., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT NEW BRITAIN, JUVENILE MATTERS, February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In probation revocation matter, court had jurisdiction over respondent and denied respondent's motion to dismiss, as statutes upon which respondent relied did not apply to juvenile proceedings.
|
|||||
| Klinkowize v. Greenwich Hosp. Assoc., CV 990170276,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, February 28, 2000, Decided , February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where plaintiff claimed wilful and wanton misconduct without alleging that defendants knew or should have known of the substantial risk to plaintiff and consciously disregarded it, she failed to state a sufficient claim.
|
|||||
| Ranieri v. Dilustro, CV 990427050S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 28, 2000, Decided , February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Patient's counterclaim against doctor alleging violation of Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act was struck since doctor only sought to recover fees in excess of what patient's insurer denominated reasonable and customary.
|
|||||
| Rimkus v. Rimkus, FA 980062482S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 28, 2000, Decided , February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Divorce was granted following trial and orders were entered dividing the property and debts, awarding alimony, and providing for medical and life insurance and taxes.
|
|||||
| State v. Richardson, CR 14485220,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 28, 2000, Decided , February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Constitutional protections did not prevent retrial of felony murder charge after mistrial, where defendant was acquitted of one potential predicate felony at first trial, but convicted of another, lesser included, felony.
|
|||||
| Statewide Griev. Comm. v. Egbarin, CV 980585474,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney's defenses of automatic stay of his suspension until expiration of appeals period and reliance on advice of counsel were ineffective to dispose of contempt proceedings for practicing law while suspended.
|
|||||
| Vining v. Amari, CV 980062088S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, February 28, 2000, Decided , February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An insured who tentatively identified a hit-and-run driver whose guilt could not be proven by police was not precluded from recovering under uninsured motorist protection.
|
|||||
| Wilverding v. Ostrowitz, CV 960334949S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 28, 2000, Decided , February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because doctor, an independent contract with hospital, may have been hospital's agent with respect to patient via apparent authority, hospital's motion for summary judgment in patient's medical malpractice suit was denied.
|
|||||
| Zahedi v. Envirotest Sys., 552215,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 28, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiffs failed to establish that the perpetrators were pursuing a company plan and failed to elaborate any theory of liability which was a requirement in exact pleading for employment discrimination.
|
|||||
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. |
