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 - April 15, 2002

  
Andino v. Fleet Fin. Group, CV990169530S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free

  
Barber v. Barber, CV00339809S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY, AT DANBURY, April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: An ex-wife's motion to discharge a lis pendens filed by her ex-husband on real property was granted; the ex-husband's claimed partnership interest was personal property, and the claim did not affect the real property in question.

Search Cases for Free

  
Conn Strux v. Town of E. Granby, CV990497551S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Construction company was awarded damages and interest on claim against town where town's actions caused substantial delays in project and effective substantial completion date was reasonable.

Search Cases for Free

  
Foti v. Chase Assocs., CV000803442S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Court denied general contractor's motion for summary judgment in subcontractor's contract, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment action against it and property owner; mechanics' lien prejudgment decision did not have res judicata effect.

Search Cases for Free

  
In re Shonna K., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL], SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUVENILE MATTERS, AT WILLIMANTIC, April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Court's jurisdiction to provide therapy to youth ended when she reached age of 18 years.

Search Cases for Free

  
In re Xavier M., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL], SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUVENILE MATTERS, AT WILLIMANTIC, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Although paternal grandmother had temporary de facto custody of children, it did not extend beyond explicit term of her guardianship; therefore, she had no standing to be aggrieved within statutory meaning.

Search Cases for Free

  
Kyle v. Soliman, 558832, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: The allegations, which were conclusory, did not support a conclusion that the parents were contemporaneously aware that the actions or failures to act of the doctor were causing the child serious injury.

Search Cases for Free

  
Miller v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Westport, CV990175518S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Court's decision denied land seller's inverse condemnation claim. Seller sold land so there was no permanent taking, and withdrew administrative appeal of variance denials so there was no final determination of partial taking.

Search Cases for Free

  
Mirjavadi v. Vakilzadeh, CV980166632, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, April 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Mother's claim was derivative of loss of filial consortium and could not stand. However, daughter suffered harm as result of her abduction, thereby suffering personal injuries.

Search Cases for Free

  
Palmer v. Deweese, FA930349817S, SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, April 15, 2002, Decided , April 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Although father failed to pay full amount of child support, he believed it was correct; therefore, he was not in contempt. Due to insufficient evidence to determine change of circumstances, deviation could not be ordered.

Search Cases for Free

  
Back to Top