Legal Opinion

Hammer v. Posta

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided February 14, 2017No. AC38194PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtAlvord, J.

The defendants, Dominic Posta and Leticia Posta, appeal from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a trial to the court, in favor of the plaintiff, Edward Hammer. After rendering a default judgment against Leticia Posta for her failure to appear, the court found Dominic Posta liable to the plaintiff under General Statutes § 22-357 1 for injuries caused by the defendants' dog and awarded the plaintiff $30,910.30 in damages and court costs. 2 On appeal, the defendants claim that the court improperly (1) denied the defendant's request for a jury trial, and (2) relied on the arguments…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
  2. L & R Realty v. Connecticut National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  3. Moye v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016
  4. Giamattei v. DicerboSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
  5. Royston v. FactorConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. J. R. v. N. K.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API