Condon v. Pomroy-Grace
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to compel the defendant to contribute a reasonable sum to the support of her mother, brought-to the Superior Court in Hartford County and tried to the court, Robinson, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiffs, and appeal by the defendant for alleged errors in the rulings and findings of the court. The plaintiffs also appealed for the refusal of the court to allow them costs.
Read the full summary
Action to compel the defendant to contribute a reasonable sum to the support of her mother, brought-to the Superior Court in Hartford County and tried to the court, Robinson, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiffs, and appeal by the defendant for alleged errors in the rulings and findings of the court. The plaintiffs also appealed for the refusal of the court to allow them costs. This action was. brought by the selectmen of the town of Bristol, under § 3318 of the General Statutes as amended by Chap. 88 of the Public Acts of 1893. The allegations of the complaint are: “ 1.…
1Opinion of the CourtHamersley, J.
The defendant’s appeal discloses no error. The judgment of the trial court found all the issues of fact in favor of the plaintiffs. The conclusions of the judgment are consistent with the subordinate facts found. The claim of inconsistency, in the only particulars suggested in the reasons of appeal, has no merit. These conclusions cannot therefore be reviewed, unless they involve some erroneous view of the law.
The assignment of errors in law lacks that clearness and distinctness which is strictly requisite. Treating the errors discussed in argument as sufficiently specified, they all depend…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cunningham v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Inhabitants of Newtown v. Inhabitants of DanburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1821
- Backus v. DudleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1821
- Select-men of Wethersfield v. MontagueSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1821
- Studwell v. CookeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1871
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Driscoll v. Jewell Belting Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- State v. GriffithsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
- Kulak v. Landers, Frary & ClarkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Tulin v. TulinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Belden v. BeldenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.