Legal Opinion
Wooster v. Wm. C. A. Fischer Plumbing & Heating Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 6, 1966PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAlcorn, J.
The plaintiffs have appealed, assigning as the only ground of error the court’s action in setting aside the verdict and ordering a new trial because of the prejudicial effect of a ruling made during the trial.
There is no finding, and consequently we turn to the memorandum of decision on the motion to set aside the verdict to learn the basis for the court’s action. Postemski v. Watrous, 151 Conn. 183, 186, 195 A.2d 425. In its memorandum the court said: “In the examination of the defendant operator, who was called as an adverse witness by the plaintiffs’ attorney, the Court permitted the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. KeatingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
- McKiernan v. LehmaierSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
- Munson v. AtwoodSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Gesualdi v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
- Postemski v. WatrousSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Pisel v. Stamford HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Tough v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Ubysz v. DiPietroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Hughes v. Town Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
- Yeske v. Avon Old Farms School, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1983
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.