Legal Opinion

Wladyka. v. City of Waterbury

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 11, 1922PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.

The demurrer which was overruled was to the original complaint which is not printed in the record. It was not renewed against the amended complaint and hence it, and its grounds, disappeared from the case unless such grounds later arose in the course of the trial. For this reason the assignment of error based upon the overruling of this demurrer is not before us and had no legitimate place in the appeal. Goodrich v. Stanton, 71 Conn. 418, 424, 42 Atl. 74; Eames v. Mayo, 93 Conn. 479, 106 Atl. 825. Assignments of error 10, 11 and 12, as to the rulings on evidence, cannot be considered, because…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Aaronson v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  2. Worth v. DunnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
  3. Goodrich v. StantonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
  4. Friedler v. HekelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
  5. Summa v. DereskiawiczSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Willoughby v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  2. Ziman v. WhitleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
  3. Hammer v. Mount Sinai HospitalConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
  4. Ford v. H. W. Dubiskie & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
  5. World Fire & Marine Insurance v. Alliance Sandblasting Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927

24 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