 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Greenbaum v. Izzo, CV030181200S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, March 1, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City employee and city's actions in avoiding, contradicting, and ignoring rules of practice and procedure, primarily by not timely filing a notice of intent to offer evidence at hearing on damages as permitted by Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. ¿ 17-34, meant the trial court was not required to consider the motion to dismiss that they filed.
|
|||||
| Hutchinson v. Farm Family Cas. Ins. Co., (SC 17113),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 1, 2005, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although Connecticut's highest court recognized exception to attorney-client privilege, akin to civil fraud exception, in cases where insurer bad faith was alleged, insureds in underinsured motorist case failed to establish its applicability where they did not even allege that insurer sought legal advice to facilitate its alleged bad faith conduct.
|
|||||
| In re Charde T., U06CP05004939A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, CHILD PROTECTION SESSION AT MIDDLETOWN, March 1, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Connecticut Department of Children and Families showed by a preponderance of the evidence that a child was in immediate danger and her immediate removal from her grandmother's home was necessary to ensure her safety where her father and his son had sexually assaulted children while they were in the grandmother's care.
|
|||||
| Krack v. Action Motors Corp., (AC 24876),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 1, 2005, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In light of the no-fault liability imposed by Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42a-2-314, the appropriateness of a car seller's reliance on a certificate of title was irrelevant. Accordingly fault was not an element of a car buyer's case under the implied warranty of merchantability. Attorney fees were also appropriate under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-251a.
|
|||||
| Milligan v. W&M Prop. of Conn., Inc., X06CV179632S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET AT WATERBURY, March 1, 2005, Decided , March 1, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property manager was not awarded summary judgment in suit by estate administrator for negligence because administrator submitted evidence that digging of trench, which collapsed and killed decedent, involved intrinsically dangerous work that required special precautions and that manager violated its duty to insure that such precautions were taken.
|
|||||
| Notre Dame High Sch. of W. Haven, Inc. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of W. Haven, 485613,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 1, 2005, Decided , March 1, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: High school's appeal of the denial of a zoning variance was dismissed where the high school failed to show it would suffer an unusual hardship by the denial of the variance; the high school's claim of hardship was based on personal financial issues, which could not support the grant of a variance.
|
|||||
| Parrot v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., SC 17062,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 1, 2005, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The state supreme court answered the certified question of whether the "entire contract" clause of Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 38a-483(a)(1) prohibited an insurer from incorporating by reference income rules in a future increase option rider to a disability insurance policy, when the application could not effect the original policy, in the negative.
|
|||||
| RYA Corp. v. Planning & Zoning Comm'n , (AC 24106), (AC 24105),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 1, 2005, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the commissioners made a formal, official, and collective statement about the commission's reason for denying the subdivision application, the commissioners' collective denial of the application for safety reasons, for which there was no regulatory basis, was sufficient to sustain the land owner's and agent's appeal.
|
|||||
| Region 14 Bd. of Educ. v. Nonnewaug Teachers' Ass'n, (SC 17138),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 1, 2005, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A court erred in holding that a teachers' association's grievance, which claimed that a board of education violated a collective bargaining agreement by failing to distribute the proceeds from an insurer's demutulization, was not arbitrable because the issue met the definition of "grievance" in the collective bargaining agreement.
|
|||||
| Renzullo v. SNET Corp., CV020087612,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, March 1, 2005, Decided , March 1, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an ad buyer alleged he did not receive the benefit of his bargain due to the publisher's deceptive misrepresentation that a photograph in the ad was for his exclusive use, he sufficiently asserted an ascertainable loss under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 42-110g(a) to prevent summary judgment on his Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act claim.
|
|||||
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. |
