Legal Opinion
Granniss v. Weber
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided May 4, 1928PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
All of the assignments of error—denial of motions for a directed verdict in favor of the defendants, and to set aside the verdict rendered, refusal to charge the jury as requested, and certain portions of the charge as given—converge and turn upon the meaning and scope of §3404 of the General Statutes, under which the action was brought.
The basic facts alleged in the complaint were that while the plaintiff was driving his automobile on a highway, in the exercise of due care, a dog owned by defendants’ minor son sprang in front of the car and by that act overturned it, injuring the plaintiff…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Woolf v. ChalkerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1862
- Kelley v. KilloureySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
- Grissell v. Housatonic RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1886
- Dorman v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Beckert v. DobleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Heimov v. ThomsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- Burke v. Board of RepresentativesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Stokes v. LyddyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- Le Mars Mutual Insurance Co. of Iowa v. BonnecroySupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
- Mancinone v. WardenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.