Legal Opinion
Omar v. Mezvinsky
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided March 1, 1988No. 5338PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpallone, J.
The defendant appeals from the judgment rendered after a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff awarding damages in the amount of $26,000. The defendant claims that the trial court erred (1) in refusing to set aside the verdict, and (2) in its refusal to give a missing witness instruction.
From the evidence adduced at trial, the jury would have been justified in finding the following facts: The plaintiff, Mohamed Omar, and the defendant, Norton Mezvinsky, were social friends of long standing prior to the present litigation. During those years, the defendant, who was skilled in investments, and…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Secondino v. New Haven Gas Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Gallo v. GalloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- State v. ScielzoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Shelnitz v. GreenbergSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Ezzo v. GeremiahSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Deming v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- McGloin v. Town of SouthingtonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Cobalt Multifamily Investors I, LLC v. ShapiroDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2014
- Hartford Fire v. General Agency, No. Cv94-05330003-S (May 12, 1994)Connecticut Superior Court · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.