Legal Opinion
Doe v. Carreiro
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided April 4, 2006No. AC 25350PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GRUENDEL, J.
The defendant, Frank E. Carreiro, Sr., appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered *628after a trial to the court, awarding the two minor plaintiffs, John Doe and Tom Doe,1 damages for his sexual abuse of them and for intentional infliction of emotional distress. On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) the court improperly admitted the opinions of two expert witnesses, through their written reports and testimony, on the ultimate issue in the case and (2) the admissions were harmful error. We conclude that the court improperly permitted one expert witness to state…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Fink v. GolenbockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- State v. BorrelliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
- State v. AliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- State v. IBAN C.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. Roy D. L.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2021
- Connecticut Bank & Trust Co. v. Munsill-Borden Mansion, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Crenshaw v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming AuthorityMohegan Gaming Disputes Court of Appeals · 2011
- Auster v. Norwalk United Methodist ChurchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Doe v. CarreiroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.