Legal Opinion
Kliarsky v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided May 9, 1933PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBanks, J.
The complaint alleged that the plaintiff’s decedent was killed as a result of a collision between an automobile which he was operating and a motor bus of the defendant, that the collision was caused by the negligence of the operator of the motor bus, and that the plaintiff’s decedent was free from contributory negligence. The answer denied that the operator of the motor bus was negligent, but affirmatively alleged that the negligence of the plaintiff’s decedent was the proximate cause of his death.
The case was tried to the court, which, on April 19th, 1932, rendered judgment in favor of the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gannon v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1903
- Gonirenki v. American Steel & Wire Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Link v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Perry v. M. M. Puklin Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Widman v. KearnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. GoldbergerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Krooner v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Dortch v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Zamatha v. HarakSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
- Civitello v. Connecticut Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.