Legal Opinion

Senderoff v. Senderoff

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 5, 1946PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtElls, J.

This is an action for divorce on the ground of adultery. Judgment was for the plaintiff and the defendant has appealed.

The finding cannot be corrected in any material respect. It states facts which reasonably support the court’s conclusion that the defendant committed adultery. The only direct testimony as to these facts was given by the plaintiff, and the defendant claims that under the law of this state his testimony, disputed by the defendant, must be corroborated by other witnesses. There was, in fact, corroboratory evidence in this case, and we could decide it upon that basis alone. To…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brookhouse v. BrookhouseMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
  3. Neff v. NeffSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
  4. Robbins v. RobbinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  5. Baker v. BakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Saphir v. NeustadtSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
  2. DeCarufel v. Colonial Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1955
  3. Reynolds v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Delaware · 1967
  4. Jarrett v. JarrettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
  5. Hensley v. Commissioner of TransportationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989

1 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