 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Amity Reg'l Sch. Dist. No. 5 v. Atlas Constr. Co., X06CV990153388S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET AT WATERBURY, March 1, 2001, Decided , March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney and client had notice that their breach of their continuing duty to disclose in discovery was a violation of the rules of practice and constituted unlawful conduct under the rules of professional conduct through opponents' arguments.
|
|||||
| Brodman v. Cea, CV 010181628S, CV010181888S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK AT STAMFORD, March 1, 2001, Decided , March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because homeowners and their invitees continued to use an extended portion of a driveway which included a section of neighboring homeowners' property for the statutory period, homeowners met the criteria for a prescriptive easement.
|
|||||
| Dinan v. Fairfield Appeal from Probate (Estate of Garafolo, CV000379844,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 1, 2001, Decided , March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's motion for permission to appeal the probate court's decision would not be dismissed, because the appeal period did not commence until appellant had actual or constructive notice that the decision had been reached.
|
|||||
| Dingle v. Fleet Bank, CV000443028S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff alleged intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress arising from discrimination. Although discrimination could have risen to required outrageous level, claims were stricken because discrimination claims were conclusory.
|
|||||
| First Nat'l Bank of Chicago v. Luecken, CV990367443,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 1, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court vacated its prior orders opening and reopening the judgment of strict foreclosure and extending the law day, because it had no jurisdiction to take such actions, and title could vest any day of the week.
|
|||||
| Medovnikov v. Medovnikov, FA990431983,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT NEW HAVEN, March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dissolution action uncovered evidence of Russian immigrant's possible involvement in tax crimes, currency violations, and money laundering, so judge ordered copies of case file transmitted to prosecutors.
|
|||||
| Midwest Fin. Acceptance Corp. v. Thames Mews Assocs., 552852,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, March 1, 2001, Decided , March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mortgagor's liability for interest resulting from mortgagee's predecessor's bad faith had to be specially pleaded as a defense prior to the trial in order to give the court and mortgagee notice of the alleged claims.
|
|||||
| Morris v. Morris, FA950325689S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 1, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court awarded child support, ordered parties to maintain health insurance for the child, required defendant father to pay 53 percent of child care expenses, awarded attorney fees for plaintiff mother, and ordered immediate wage withholding.
|
|||||
| Original Grasso Constr. v. Shepard, CV980350662,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 1, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
