Pierce v. Gittens
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover damages for the negligence of the defendant’s testator, an attorney at law, whereby the plaintiff was prevented from collecting the amount of a promissory note for SI,500, brought to the Superior Court in New London County and tried to the court, Thayer, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the defendant, and appeal by the plaintiff for alleged errors in the rulings and findings of the court.
Read the full summary
Action to recover damages for the negligence of the defendant’s testator, an attorney at law, whereby the plaintiff was prevented from collecting the amount of a promissory note for SI,500, brought to the Superior Court in New London County and tried to the court, Thayer, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the defendant, and appeal by the plaintiff for alleged errors in the rulings and findings of the court. The defendant is the executor of Charles Perrin, late of Stonington, who in his lifetime was an attorney at law practicing in the village of Westerly. The plaintiff claimed that he…
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, C. J.
All the reasons following the sixth are founded upon errors alleged to have been made by the trial court in finding or refusing to find certain facts upon conflicting evidence, and in the degree of credit to be given to witnesses. Under such circumstances the finding as made must remain unchanged. Atwater v. Morning News Co., 67 Conn. 504; Thresher v. Dyer, 69 id. 404; Hygeia Distilled Water Co. v. Hygeia Ice Co., 70 id. 516.
The seventh reason of appeal is this: “ The court erred in finding, upon the evidence certified and on file, that the plaintiff told Perrin that there was a mistake about…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Atwater v. Morning News Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bloch Bros. v. FerchaudLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1916