Filter This View

  • In the Interest of N. S. E.

    Publication Date: 2008-08-15
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0096

    The juvenile court's failure to hold a sua sponte competency hearing did not violate the father's due process rights, since such hearings are not required in termination

  • Smith v. McDowell

    Publication Date: 2008-08-01
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0645

    A school receptionist's actions in failing to consult a 6-year-old child's information card, after receiving an apparently fraudulent call and fax instructing her to release the child to her

  • Hinton v. State

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0303

    Significant evidence, other than a co field test, authorized the jury to find that the defendant possessed co

  • Ferguson v. State

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0117

    Defense counsel was not deficient for failing to file a futile motion to suppress drug evidence officers obtained under a search warrant for a package delivered to a UPS store, which the defendant cl

  • Williams v. State

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0277

    The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting several witnesses' statements that the defendant had thrown something while he was fleeing from officers under the excited utterance ex

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Connecticut Appellate Practice & Procedure, 8th Edition

    Authors: HON. ELIOT D. PRESCOTT, JULIE A. LAVOIE

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Wilen v. Murray

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0206

    The appellant's attorney was his agent and his hiring of an expert witness in an underlying property damages lawsuit was within the scope of his auth

  • Petroleum Realty II LLC v. Boca Petroco Inc.

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0248

    A court in one does not have subject matter jurisdiction over real property in another and cannot affect the title of property in another

  • Burroughs v. State

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0733

    The trial court did not err in sentencing the defendant for felony pimping, since the defendant was charged with instructing a person to commit prostitution and receiving money therefrom, knowing it

  • In the Interest of J. D.

    Publication Date: 2008-07-03
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0592

    The father's history of inadequate housing, lack of support, domestic violence and repeated incarceration, supported the termination of his parental rights to his two chi

  • McCray v. Federal Nat'l Mortgage Assoc.

    Publication Date: 2008-06-20
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A08A0032; A08A0266

    The Court granted summary judgment to the lender in its suit against borrowers for the difference between the amount owed on loans secured by real property and the amount obtained after a foreclosure