 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Annex Young Men's Ass'n v. City of New Haven, CV920337103S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In non-profit organization's suit against the city involving real estate assessed valuation, court granted city's motion to reargue, but denied them supplemental judgment since court had considered comparables and highest and best use.
|
|||||
| Barakos v. Barakos, FA000274431,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT MERIDEN, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Unavoidable circumstances, rather than either party, were primarily at fault in breakdown of marriage. Marital assets were equitably divided and husband was to pay spousal support.
|
|||||
| Bucherati v. Bucherati, CV010457937S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parental immunity doctrine barred unemancipated minor from bringing tort action against his or her parent and applied unless exception was identified. Motion to strike complaint was granted where child sued her father for personal injuries.
|
|||||
| In re Nicholas M., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, JUVENILE MATTERS AT NEW HAVEN, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The mother's attempt to rehabilitate did not come in time for her to retain her parental rights, as another year or more was too long for the boys to wait to see if the mother could assume a parental role in their difficult lives.
|
|||||
| Longo v. Md. Cas. Co., CV980262311S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT MERIDEN, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because injured party could not collect from insurer at time of accident, insurer was liable for available underinsured motorist benefits and was not entitled to credit for monies already paid by tortfeasor.
|
|||||
| Lucas v. Pina, CV000500499S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Relation back doctrine was applied to eight counts of amended complaint to defeat defendants' argument that the counts stated new causes of action barred by the statute of limitations, and defendants' motion to strike those claims was denied.
|
|||||
| McDonald v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co., CV000595517S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was the clear intention that the fleet policy in question carried UM/UIM limits of $ 20,000/$ 40,000. The injured party submitted no evidence to the contrary. Since $ 170,000 was received by the injured party, the insurer had no liability.
|
|||||
| Pulver v. Haslam, CV010381556S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Builder owed legal duty to homeowner to make deck safe. Use to which deck was put was as intended and injured party was foreseeable user; therefore, builder could be held responsible if deck was constructed negligently.
|
|||||
| Robinson v. Hein, CV92299893S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, March 4, 2002, Decided , March 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Whether there was a mutual mistake or misrepresentation in a real estate contract raised questions of motive, intent, and subjective feelings. Summary judgment was inappropriate in dealing with those questions.
|
|||||
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. |
