Legal Opinion
McSwiggan v. Kaminsky
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided August 30, 1994No. 12283PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpear, J.
The plaintiff appeals from the judgment rendered in his favor in a personal injury action. He claims that the trial court’s instructions as to the difficulty of proving pain and suffering improperly enlarged his burden of proof. We agree and reverse the judgment.
The jury reasonably could have found the following facts. On May 1, 1988, the plaintiff was standing in a parking lot when a car operated by the defendant Kera A. Kaminsky and owned by the defendant Zane Kaminsky backed up and struck the plaintiff. The force was sufficient to break the plaintiff’s left leg and turn his foot 180…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Preston v. KeithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Castaldo v. D'ERAMOSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
- Goodmaster v. HouserSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Buckley v. LovalloConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Thames River Recycling, Inc. v. GalloConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Murray v. TaylorConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- Geary v. Wentworth Laboratories, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2000
- Drew v. K-Mart Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1995
- Gajewski v. PaveloConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.