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 - March 4, 2003

  
Allen v. Appeal from Probate, 396624, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Widow's appeal from a probate decree regarding her husband's estate was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because she failed to meet the return of process date and her attempt to amend the date still did not meet the time limitation.

Search Cases for Free

  
Allister v. Allister, FA020467756, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 4, 2003, Decided , March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: In divorce action, parties were awarded joint legal custody of child, husband was ordered to pay weekly child support, parties were each ordered to maintain medical/dental insurance for child, and parties were ordered to locate husband's Green Card.

Search Cases for Free

  
Apicella v. Gladstein, CV010094032S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, March 4, 2003, Decided , March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free

  
Carnemolla v. Walsh, (AC 22512), APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 4, 2003, Officially Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Collateral estoppel based on criminal conviction precluded issue of employment status in wrongful termination case, despite the fact that the conviction had been appealed. At-will employee failed to prove that her termination violated public policy.

Search Cases for Free

  
D'Orlando v. D'Orlando, 020468658, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 4, 2003, Decided , March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Where both parties were equally responsible for the marriage's breakdown, it could be dissolved on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown; alimony was awarded to the wife and the parties equitably divided their property.

Search Cases for Free

  
Dalton v. Bua, File No. CV03-0472311S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 4, 2003, Decided , March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: A motion to strike filed by neighbors was granted as to property owners' action seeking to force the neighbors to trim a hedge under Connecticut's malicious structure statutes, as a hedge was not a structure for purposes of those statutes.

Search Cases for Free

  
First Nat'l Bank of Chi. v. Maynard, (AC 22754), APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 4, 2003, Officially Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Approval of foreclosure by sale to unregistered bidder was affirmed where mortgagee failed to show how it was injured by irregularity, bid was two-thirds of value attributed to property by court, and denying motion to reopen auction was not in error.

Search Cases for Free

  
Fort Trumbull Conservancy, LLC v. Alves, (SC 16667), SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, March 4, 2003, Officially Released
View this case - free  

Overview: The conservancy group alleged conduct by the city and corporation that, if proven, constituted a violation of the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act in regard to the intended demolition of certain historic buildings.

Search Cases for Free

  
Hickey v. Hickey, FA000159549, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, March 4, 2003, Decided , March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free

  
Jaffe v. RC III Dev., CV00505916, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, March 4, 2003, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Where the client and the attorney had three weeks to prepare for a contempt hearing and the majority of a hearing was devoted to their defenses and explanations, their constitutional rights were not violated and a rehearing was unnecessary.

Search Cases for Free

  
Back to Top