Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of New London County

Court

New London County

Connecticut

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2022-11-01
Type W 00 Wills Probate Appeals
Docket 21 entries
Disposition judgment after completed trial to the court with no jury

Parties

Plaintiff Thomas K. Morgan
Defendant Elizabeth M. Baird
Photo of Hon. Hon Daniel Shapiro

Judge

Hon. Hon Daniel Shapiro

New London County (CT)

Connecticut

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  2. SUMMONS
  3. COMPLAINT
  4. RETURN OF SERVICE
  5. DEMAND FOR PROBATE APPEAL TO BE HEARD BY SUPERIOR COURT CGS 45a-186(i)(1) Probate Appeal - Marshal Romano
  6. DEMAND FOR PROBATE APPEAL TO BE HEARD BY SUPERIOR COURT CGS 45a-186(i)(1) Probate Appeal Marshal DeLorenzo
  7. DEMAND FOR PROBATE APPEAL TO BE HEARD BY SUPERIOR COURT CGS 45a-186(i)(1)
  8. REQUEST TO REVISE
  9. MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RESULT: Off 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  10. ORDER RESULT: Off 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  11. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION Motion to Consolidate
  12. MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CORRECTED RESULT: Off 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  13. ORDER RESULT: Off 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  14. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE - CORRECTED
  15. OBJECTION TO MOTION Objection to Motion to Consolidate
  16. REQUEST FOR ARGUMENT - NON-ARG MATTER (JD-CV-128) RESULT: Granted 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  17. ORDER RESULT: Granted 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  18. REQUEST FOR ARGUMENT - NON-ARG MATTER (JD-CV-128) RESULT: Granted 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  19. ORDER RESULT: Granted 1/30/2023 HON STEVEN JACOBS
  20. OBJECTION TO REQUEST TO REVISE
  21. CASEFLOW REQUEST (JD-CV-116)

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more