Legal Opinion

Clinton v. Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co.

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided March 21, 1995No. 14203PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLavery, J.

The plaintiffs, Judith and Edward Clinton, appeal from the denial of a motion to reconsider the trial court’s denial of their motion for a temporary injunction. The defendant moves to dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment. We agree that the appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final judgment.

The plaintiffs are the insured under a homeowner’s insurance policy issued by the defendant. They brought an action against the defendant based on allegations *270that the defendant had refused to settle the plaintiffs’ insurance claims, which they submitted after a fire destroyed their home.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Olcott v. PendletonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
  2. Laurel Park, Inc. v. PacSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  3. Board of Education v. Shelton Education Assn.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
  4. French v. Amalgamated Local Union 376, UAWSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  5. City of Stamford v. KovacSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Rustici v. MalloyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
  2. Lantz v. ColemanConnecticut Superior Court · 2008
  3. Danso v. University of ConnecticutConnecticut Superior Court · 2007
  4. Morgan v. MorganConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
  5. 18 Brewer Associates v. Mormino, No. Cvh 01-6792 (May 8, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API