 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| 1368 Wing Dev. Corp. v. Chan, CV075101397,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON AT NORWICH, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants were not entitled to strike the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b et seq., counts of plaintiffs' complaint because these claims involved defendants' dual representation of buyer and seller in the transaction at issue, including an allegation that defendants failed to inform plaintiffs of this arrangement.
|
|||||
| Carpi v. Carpi, FSTFA064008482S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK AT STAMFORD, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Wife failed to show basis for altering agreement to pay taxes for last full year husband and wife were married based on ownership in limited liability company, 99 percent for wife and one percent for husband; thus, judgment incorporating it pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-212a and Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 17-4 could not be opened.
|
|||||
| City Fish Mkt., Inc. v. Tolly, CV075003925S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, July 31, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was no evidence that either of the former shareholders had any conversation with representatives of a company, let alone orally agreed to assume personal liability, the company did not prove that the shareholders assumed personal responsibility for money due on fish that was sold to the corporation under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 33-673(b).
|
|||||
| Conn. Bus. & Indus. Ass'n v. Ahrens, CV030830311,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD AT HARTFORD, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment motions were denied as there was a disputed fact as to whether an employer's vice president was operating a plane involved in a fatal crash for an aviation company that he owned and operated, or for the employer. The defendants' materials did not resolve whether the employer "operated" an aircraft in the course of doing business.
|
|||||
| DeMars v. Chatelle, 085002561S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM AT PUTNAM, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff did not allege any facts establishing the essential elements of his adverse possession claim, but merely advanced an unsupported legal conclusion; thus, he failed to state a cause of action. As his quiet title action under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47-31(a) was based on the adverse possession claim, his quiet title action had to be dismissed.
|
|||||
| Garewski v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, HHBCV064012702,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Board did not act in unreasonable, arbitrary, or illegal manner in upholding denial of unemployment benefits to worker; evidence showed he engaged in deliberate misconduct in willful disregard of employer's interest and in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-236(a)(16) in assisting coworker in removing for their own use they knew not to be theirs.
|
|||||
| Harris v. Harris, FA920513790,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD AT HARTFORD, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Henderson v. CVS Pharm., CV085017128,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT NEW HAVEN, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When the pleadings were construed broadly, it was apparent that there were alleged facts that could allow for a finding that the pharmacist acted recklessly. Thus, the motion to strike that count was denied. However, it was granted as to the Connecticut Product Liability Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-572m, as the pharmacist was not a product seller.
|
|||||
| In re Noemi J., H12CP06010897A, H12CP06010898A, H12CP06010899A, H12CP06010900A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, CHILD PROTECTION SESSION AT MIDDLETOWN, July 31, 2008, Decided, July 31, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of parental rights was in the best interest of the four children of a mother and father, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-112(j)(2). The children were in clean, safe, healthy, nurturing and loving environments, and the mother had not demonstrated proof of any completion of services that would encourage the belief that she had rehabilitated.
|
|||||
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. |
