Legal Opinion

Samaha v. Mauro

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 4, 1926PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHinmakt, J.

The first seven of the assignments of error relate to claimed errors of the trial court in its conclusions based upon the facts. The appellant does not contend that the facts as found do not support the conclusions sought to be attacked, but his purpose and attempt is to deprive these conclusions of such support by obtaining correction of the finding as to numerous material subordinate and ultimate facts. In furtherance of this purpose counsel adopted the method provided by § 5832 of the General Statutes to the extent of making all the evidence part of the record in lieu of a motion to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hellman v. KarpSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
  2. Hartford-Connecticut Trust Co. v. CambellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Birgel v. HeintzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  2. Slabinski v. DixSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
  3. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co. v. SciortinoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
  4. Gorczyca v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
  5. Wochek v. FoleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984

9 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