Legal Opinion
Rosenberg v. Castaneda
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided August 1, 1995No. 13213PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
The plaintiff was injured in a fall on the defendants’ property. The defendants1 appeal from the judgment for the plaintiff rendered after a trial to the court. They claim that (1) the evidence did not support an award of damages to the plaintiff and (2) even if damages were warranted, the amount awarded was excessive.
The plaintiff cross appealed, claiming that the trial court improperly allowed the defendants untimely to amend their answer to include a special defense of con-*630tributary negligence. We reverse the judgment on the defendants’ appeal and affirm the trial court’s action on the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Struckman v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- DuBose v. CarabettaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
- Murray v. KrenzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Falby v. ZarembskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Oborski v. New Haven Gas Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lopiano v. LopianoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Fahey v. Safeco Insurance of AmericaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Wexler v. DeMaioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Sabatasso v. HoganConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Sherman v. Bristol Hospital, No. Cv98-0485922s (Jun. 4, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.