Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “The Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation”
Doe v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
268 F.Supp.2d 139 (2003) Jane DOE, Plaintiff, v. The NORWICH ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION, St. Columbia Church and Patrick J. Sullivan, Defendants. No. 3:02CV1649 (GLG). United States District Court, D. Connecticut. June 26, 2003. *140 Hubert J. Santos, Sandra L. Snaden, Santos & Seeley, Hartford, CT, for Plaintiff.
Doe v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
309 F.Supp.2d 247 (2004) Jane DOE Plaintiff, v. THE NORWICH ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION; St. Columba Church and Patrick J. Sullivan Defendants. No. 3:02 CV 1649(GLG). United States District Court, D. Connecticut. February 17, 2004. *248 *249 Hubert J. Santos, Sandra L. Snaden, Santos &
Doe v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
*209 Opinion VERTEFEUILLE, J. In this appeal, we are asked to decide when the thirty year statute of limitations period under General Statutes § 52-577d,1 triggered by a minor victim of sexual assault attaining the age of majority, begins to run for the plaintiff, David Doe, who was nineteen years old when
Fulco v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
Per Curiam. In this appeal concerning the applicability of the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act, General Statutes (Rev. to 1989) *405§ 31-284 (a),1 we granted certification to consider whether the Appellate Court had improperly concluded that the plaintiff had not suffered a job related injury when he was discharged in a
Fulco v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
Hetman, J. The plaintiff appeals from the trial court’s judgment in favor of the defendant on the second, fourth, sixth and seventh counts of the complaint. The trial court rendered its judgment after granting the defendant’s motion to strike these counts and their corresponding prayers for relief. See Practice Book § 152 (1). The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly (1) refused to apply retrospect
Fulco v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 27 Conn. App. 800, is granted, limited to the following question: “In the circumstances of this case, was the plaintiff’s claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress barred by the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act, General Statutes § 31-284 (a)?”
The appellant’s brief having been filed, the motion by the defendants to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in New London County is denied.
164 Conn. 472 (1973) THE NORWICH ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION v. THE SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND CONTRACTING COMPANY ET AL. Supreme Court of Connecticut. Argued January 4, 1973. Decided March 8, 1973. HOUSE, C. J., SHAPIRO, LOISELLE, MACDONALD and BOGDANSKI, JS. *473 Milton L. Jacobson, with whom was William R. M
Kubala v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
41 A.3d 351 (2011) 52 Conn.Supp. 218 Dorothy KUBALA v. HARTFORD ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION et al.[*] No. CV-10-6014903-S. Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of New Haven. May 20, 2011. *354 John A. Cirello, New Haven, for the plaintiff. Beverly S. Knapp, James A. Al
Per Curiam. The plaintiff brought this action in the Superior Court in Hartford County seeking interest allegedly due on an arbitration award. On that issue the court found in favor of the defendant, and from its judgment the plaintiff has appealed. The facts, as stipulated to by the parties and found by the court, are as follows: On April 4,1966, the parties entered into a contract whereby the
Doe v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesepublic domain
909 A.2d 983 (2006) 40 Conn.Sup. 667 John L. DOE v. NORWICH ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE et al. No. X07CV020084006S. Superior Court of Connecticut, Complex Litigation Docket at Tolland. August 10, 2006. *984 Robert I. Reardon, Jr., New London, for the plaintiff. Joseph T. Sweeney, Hartford, and Raymond B.
marineau v. roman catholic diocese of burlingtonpublic domain
Vermont Superior Court Filed 11/16 23 Chittenden nit VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CHI'ITENDEN UNIT
*78 RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS SMITH, United States Magistrate Judge. The plaintiff, Frank Martinelli, brings this diversity action alleging the intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and related torts stemming from his sexual abuse by the defendant Father Laurence Brett. This civil action was tried before a jury beginning Aug
Doe v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
I INTRODUCTION Presently before the court is the motion to strike the first, second and third counts of *Page 389 the complaint of the plaintiff, Jane Doe. The motion is filed by the defendants, the Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation, the Church of the Holy Spirit and Father John T. O'Connor. The motion should be granted as to the first count and d
Doe v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburgpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, v. Civ. Action No. 20-1750 (EGS) THE ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF GREENSBURG, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction Plaintiff John Doe (“Plaintiff” or “Mr. Doe”) brings this case against Defendants Roman Catholic Di
Beach v. Jeanpublic domain
I INTRODUCTION The plaintiff, Tracy Beach, has filed suit against the named defendant, the Reverend Father Raymond J. Jean, the defendant Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation (diocese) and the defendant Notre Dame Church Corporation of Durham (Notre Dame Church), alleging that Jean, while a Roman Catholic priest, committed numerous acts of sexual assault, sexual abuse and sexual exploitat
Rosado v. Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.public domain
I INTRODUCTION Presently before the court is a renewed motion for summary judgment1 filed by the named *Page 398 defendant, the Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation. The complaints of the multiple plaintiffs allege that Father Raymond Pcolka (Pcolka), a Roman Catholic priest serving in the Roman Catholic d
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DIOCESAN DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS BASED ON LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION WILLIAM P. JOHNSON, District Judge. THIS CASE involves claims of severe sexual abuse and molestation perpetrated upon Plaintiff Eran Joseph McManemy (“Plaintiff’) in the early 1990’s by several Roman Catholic priests when Plaintiff was a minor child living in Alamogordo, New M
10 F.Supp.2d 138 (1998) Frank MARTINELLI, Plaintiff, v. BRIDGEPORT ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION, Defendant. No. 3:93CV1482 (JBA). United States District Court, D. Connecticut. March 31, 1998. *139 *140 William M. Laviano, Donna L. Ruhling-Laviano, Jennifer D. Laviano, Laviano Law Office
Nutt v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesepublic domain
56 F.Supp.2d 195 (1999) Matthew J. NUTT, Mark D. Nutt, Plaintiffs, v. THE NORWICH ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE, Thomas J. Doyle, S.M., the Sacred Heart Church of Vernon, Connecticut, the Marianist Society, Inc., Brother Stephen Dematteis, and Father Michael Melendez, Defendants. Civil No. 3:94CV00776AVC. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. March 16, 1999.