|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
Connecticut - February 28, 2001
|
| |
Boles v. Metro-North, CV000158782S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where cross-claimants made several allegations, which, if proven, could have shown that railroad had exclusive control over accident between train and truck, railroad's motion to strike cross-claimant's indemnity claim was denied.
|
|
| |
Bombalicki v. Pastore, 378772,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT NEW HAVEN, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The system used by defendants to award promotions to police lieutenant violated the provision of the city charter in question; however, because plaintiff had already been promoted to lieutenant, no meaningful relief was available to plaintiff.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Burns v. City of New Haven, CV990432309S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Plaintiff, in personal injury claim arising out of minor car accident, did not sustain his burden of proving his injuries were proximately caused by accident.
|
|
| |
Deercliff Homeowners Ass'n v. Seraya, Inc., CV970482805S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In an action to foreclose a claimed lien for upaid common charges on a common lot, corporation failed to demonstrate good cause for opening previous default judgments entered for failure to answer and for discovery abuses.
|
|
| |
Donahue v. Thomas, CV00161182S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where plaintiff, in action for personal injuries from car-pedestrian accident, alleged defendant's statutory violations were "substantial factors" in causing her injuries, she satisfactorily pleaded claim for reckless operation of motor vehicle.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Fontanez v. Allstate Ins. Co., CV990175137,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK AT STAMFORD, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Policy holder lacked standing to bring claim that insurance company was refusing to enter into good faith settlement discussions and pay just compensation for the injuries suffered by her husband, the covered insured, in a motor vehicle accident.
|
|
| |
Garofalo v. Boyer, CV980582789S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Since defendant was unlikely to prevail in her appeal, there was no evidence of irreparable harm to defendant, and termination was in the public interest, the court terminated an automatic stay on a foreclosure sale.
|
|
| |
Jainchill v. Friends of Keney Park, CV000800130S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, February 28, 2001, Decided , February 28, 2001, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Police officer who was injured while working at a function held at a public park, was barred from suing the function organizer based upon the policy reasons set out in the "firefighter rule."
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|