Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Nedovich
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 22, 1989No. 7346PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.
The named defendant,1 Joan V. Nedovich, appeals from the judgment denying her motion to dissolve or reduce an ex parte prejudgment attachment pursuant to General Statutes § 52-278e. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in finding that probable cause existed to support the validity of the plaintiff’s claim. We find no error.
The plaintiff commenced this negligence action against Steven Riter and Joan Nedovich alleging that on March 11,1988, due to Riter’s negligent operation of Nedovich’s automobile, Riter caused the car to go out of control. He also alleged that the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Texas v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Solomon v. AbermanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Three S. Development Co. v. SantoreSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Wall v. ToomeySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
- Koops v. GreggSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Connecticut v. DoehrSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- People's Bank v. Bilmor Building Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Fischel v. TKPK, Ltd.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. SheaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Lovesky v. ZeligzonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.