|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
Connecticut - March 9, 2000
|
| |
Children's Health Care v. Administrator, CV 990173792,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Employer's repeated failure to pay employee's wages justified employee's decision to leave her employment; therefore, leaving was not voluntary and employee was entitled to unemployment insurance benefits.
|
|
| |
Crenshaw v. Administrator, CV 990498448S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT NEW BRITAIN, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Record did not support employment security board of review's finding that claimant committed act of insubordination that was an act of disqualifying misconduct; thus, she was eligible for unemployment compensation benefits.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Hogan v. Jung-Hogan, 414789,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In action alleging irretrievable breakdown of marriage, stipulation of parties approved; husband ordered to pay child care and alimony; parties ordered to pay respective liabilities.
|
|
| |
Hoover v. Jjl Elec. Llc, CV 990088118S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Town's motion for summary judgment was denied because plaintiff's municipal negligence complaint alleged state of disrepair on premises leased from town prior to arrival of independent contractor.
|
|
| |
Mazza v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., CV 960130546,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Motion to strike fifth count of plaintiffs' negligence claim against defendant power company granted; no public policy prevented a provider of services from discontinuing services out of obligation to third parties.
|
|
| |
Ortiz v. Waterbury Hosp., CV 990154112,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Public policy reasons existed to deny recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress to mother, who did not have physician-patient relationship with physician examining her daughter for signs of sexual abuse.
|
|
| |
|
| |
State v. Santiago, CR 6485320,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant juvenile's motion to suppress statements admitting to sexual assault denied, because statute requiring presence of parent when statement made applied only to juvenile proceedings, defendant was charged as adult.
|
|
| |
Stratton v. Stratton, 0117915,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, March 9, 2000, Decided , March 9, 2000, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant's appeal of magistrate's decision for child support dismissed as untimely because it was not filed within 14-day appeal period, and unavailability of transcript of magistrate's decision did not toll time for filing.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|