Articles Tagged: 612 A.2d 55

612 A.2d 55 JACQUELINE M. WANTA v. ROBERT J. WANTA Supreme Court of Connecticut The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 27 Conn. App. 913, is denied. Robert J. Wanta, pro se, in support of the petition. Roberta S. Friedman, in opposition. Decided July 9, 1992

612 A.2d 55 WILLIAM PARKER v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION WOODROW CHAPMAN v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION GLENN BOWERS v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION JAMES BRANTLEY v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION DOUGLAS FRANKLIN v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION JOHNNIE GATES v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION ALVIN MOORE v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION WILLIAM SHELTON v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION MELVIN JONES v. COMMISSIONER […]

612 A.2d 55 WILLIAM PARKER v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION WOODROW CHAPMAN v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION GLENN BOWERS v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION JAMES BRANTLEY v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION DOUGLAS FRANKLIN v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION JOHNNIE GATES v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION ALVIN MOORE v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION WILLIAM SHELTON v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION MELVIN JONES v. COMMISSIONER […]

612 A.2d 55 MIDDLESEX INSURANCE COMPANY v. JAMES J. QUINN III ET AL. Supreme Court of Connecticut The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 27 Conn. App. 573, is granted, limited to the following question: “Does public policy preclude an automobile insurer from excluding from uninsured motorist coverage a resident family […]

612 A.2d 55 MICHAEL J. MADIGAN v. MICHELLE A. MADIGAN Supreme Court of Connecticut The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court is granted, limited to the following question: “Is an appeal from pendente lite orders of custody and visitation, entered in a dissolution of marriage action, of such finality as to […]

612 A.2d 55 JAMES B. DIAMOND v. GEORGE MARCINEK ET AL. Supreme Court of Connecticut The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 27 Conn. App. 353, is granted, limited to the following question: “In the circumstances of this case, was the plaintiff entitled to rescission and restitution relating to rescission because […]