Legal Opinion
Meallady v. City of New London
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 7, 1933PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBanks, J.
The appeal is from the refusal of the trial court to set aside the verdict as contrary to the law and the evidence. It is contended that the jury was not justified in finding (1) that the plaintiff was free from contributory negligence, or (2) that reasonable supervision by the city of its streets and sidewalks would have disclosed the slippery condition complained of by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff’s own testimony furnished the only direct evidence as to her conduct at the time she fell. She fell as she was crossing the street. She was wearing a pair of new rubbers and testified that before…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ritter v. City of SheltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Crotty v. City of DanburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
- Schroeder v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Blake v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Wood v. City of DanburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Baker v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Rodriguez v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Hauser v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Older v. Town of Old LymeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Falkowski v. MacDonaldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.