 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cornacchia v. Envtl. Prot. Comm'n , AC 27661,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-42a(f), homeowners' application for a permit to build an in-ground swimming pool on their property in an upland review area was improperly denied because no evidence in the record supported a finding that a significant impact to wetlands or watercourses would occur from the construction activities in the upland area.
|
|||||
| Earl B. v. Comm'r of Children & Families, SC 18063,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although juvenile had been released from training school and was placed elsewhere, his moot case was still reviewable because issue might reoccur; too, appellate court could find based on text of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-15 and common usage of words in it that he had right to hearing to challenge temporary placement provision of his treatment plan.
|
|||||
| Greater New Haven Prop. Owners Ass'n v. City of New Haven, SC 17900,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in finding Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-148(c)(7)(A) allowed city under New Haven, Conn., Code of Ordinances § 17-13.1 et seq., to impose licensing and inspection requirements upon certain residential rental properties; that statute's broad grant of police power allowed such requirements despite them not being stated in the statute.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. H.N.S. Mgmt. Co., AC 28947,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Without interrogatories, appellate court could not review instruction claim and upheld denial of motion to set aside verdict for common carrier on negligence complaint because it was unable to determine whether jury found for carrier because passenger could not prove her allegations or carrier prevailed on special defense of comparative negligence.
|
|||||
| Kaczynski v. Kaczynski, AC 28077,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in considering the value of property it found had been fraudulently transferred by husband when it entered its financial and property distribution orders in a dissolution action because the court did not specifically or implicitly make a finding of fraud by clear and convincing evidence.
|
|||||
| Pond View, LLC v. Planning & Zoning Comm'n, SC 17878,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the issues challenged by the intervenors were not environmental issues traditionally within the scope of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-19, as any environmental harm necessarily would result from the developer's conduct in actually developing the property, not from the zone change at issue in the appeal, the intervenors lacked standing.
|
|||||
| Popick v. Maloof, TTDFA990069628S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND AT ROCKVILLE, July 29, 2008, Decided, July 29, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that mother committed a wilful violation of trial court's order to present mother and father's child for father's one-hour weekly visitation at counseling agency; she sometimes had to make reasonable changes to visitation schedule and two missed visits were caused by father's improper behavior.
|
|||||
| Ruggiero v. Pellicci, FSTCV044001485S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, July 29, 2008, Decided, July 29, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Saczynski v. Saczynski, AC 28613,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, July 29, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defense verdict in slip and fall case was affirmed because jury was instructed on both denial of the allegations and special defense of contributory negligence, either of which could have supported jury's general verdict, interrogatories were not submitted to jury, and appellate claim related only to the jury's finding as to negligence.
|
|||||
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. |
