 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ambrose v. Golden Rule Ins. Co., CV075003730S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF DANBURY AT DANBURY, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurer's motion to strike CUTPA and Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act claims was granted, as insureds claims merely reiterated statutory language without alleging sufficient facts to support claims, and insured did not allege that the insurer treated other claimants unfairly in a manner that was tantamount to a general business practice.
|
|||||
| Brown v. Campbell, TTDCV085002518S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND AT ROCKVILLE, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a property owner provided shelter for a dog which had the full run of his home and yard, and fed, watered, and cared for the dog, albeit intermittently, a person of ordinary intelligence would justifiably entertain the belief that the property owner was keeper of the dog under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 22-357.
|
|||||
| City of Derby v. Garofalo, 5004821,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA-MILFORD AT MILFORD, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Former mayor moved to strike city's suit alleging he improperly deleted data from city computers. Motion was denied, as Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-557n did not confer immunity on city officers, and as to common law immunity, court could not determine from face of complaint whether mayor was engaging in a governmental function in performing acts alleged.
|
|||||
| Gantos v. A.F. Peck, Inc., CV044001933S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT NEW HAVEN, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Kelly Designs v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co., 5003819,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA-MILFORD AT MILFORD, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to strike breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing counts was granted as dicta in Alexandru v. Strong stating that absent allegations of a dishonest purpose or sinister motive, a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing was legally insufficient was a persuasive and a balanced statement of the law.
|
|||||
| Lavoie v. S. New Eng. Tel. Co., CV075010106S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD AT HARTFORD, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment motion was granted as federal court held that an employee's claim did not fall under ERISA, which determined the ERISA claim on its merits. As the employee did not bring supplemental claims, her state misrepresentation claim was time-barred under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-577 and Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-592 did not apply.
|
|||||
| Lyons v. W. Haven Zoning Bd. of Appeals, CV074024554S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT NEW HAVEN, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Matter was remanded to the Zoning Board of Appeals of West Haven to articulate what was incomplete with respect to the "application" at the time the issue was presented to the City Planner as the ZBA failed to explain what was incomplete when it denied the building applicants' application because it was incomplete.
|
|||||
| Martocchio v. Savoir, TTDFA064006261,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND AT ROCKVILLE, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the grandparents were essentially seeking to substitute their judgment as to the best course of medical treatment for their grandson for the judgment of the father, who was a fit parent, the father was to continue to have sole custody of the child with sole decision-making as to medical and educational issues under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 46b-56.
|
|||||
| Passera v. Passera, TTDFA074007609S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND AT ROCKVILLE, July 28, 2008, Decided, July 28, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the court was misled by an incorrect figure in the wife's financial affidavit, the actual mortgage balance on the marital residence was corrected; other changes and clarifications were also made to a memorandum decision by the court.
|
|||||
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. |
