|
|
| |
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 9, 2002
|
| |
Barber v. Hafez & Hafez Co., CV000340305S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The carpenter, who performed work on a store, was entitled to judgment on the allegations of quantum meruit as well as implied contract and unjust enrichment. The reasonable value of his services was accurate and proper.
|
|
| |
Boynton v. Sec. Nat'l Servicing Corp., CV02389732S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Calabrese v. Finno Dev., CV990151991S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: A company's motion to disqualify the purchasers' counsel in a dispute over a construction contract was denied; the representation did not violate rules of professional conduct, and the purchasers would be prejudiced by disqualification.
|
|
| |
City of New Haven v. Conn. Siting Council, CV020513195S, CV020513196S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Connecticut energy facility siting agency's determination that submarine energy and telecommunications cables were not environmental threats received deference; court denied stay pending review.
|
|
| |
Dent v. Lovejoy, CV940137460,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Evidence showed 50 foot birch tree had been present prior to the deed and therefore was exempt from the deed. Since the birch clump grew after the deed, it was subject to conditions of the deed regarding a view easement.
|
|
| |
Forestville Lumber Co. v. Quality Insulation, CV000500719,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Foreclosure of the corporation's mechanic's lien on the homeowner's home was allowed in the amount of $ 9,747. While it was not contested that the homeowner paid other sums, they were for items not covered by the contract.
|
|
| |
Fuller v. Adm'r, CV990334517S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where unemployment compensation claimant asserted that his appeal was untimely, as he understood that he needed attorney to file it, court found that he did not establish good cause for untimely filing of appeal.
|
|
| |
Gianetti v. Norwalk Hosp., CV980354312S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Three-year statute of limitations barred doctor's CUTPA action against hospital; continuing course of conduct doctrine did not toll statute of limitations, as doctor was aware of actionable harm more than three years before he filed action.
|
|
| |
Hamlin v. Hamlin, FA000374481S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Court granted divorce, entered property division orders, ordered real estate sold and proceeds divided, and required husband to pay alimony; husband's interest in employer, financed by employer, was more than expectancy and so was property.
|
|
| |
Harris v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., CV990169824,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, April 9, 2002, Decided , April 9, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Injured party, business invitee, failed to prove that supermarket was liable for her slip and fall. There were caution warnings in area where fall occurred. There was no proof that supermarket was aware of any water on floor where she fell.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback