Legal Opinion
Elliott v. Larson
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided February 10, 2004No. AC 23923PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LAVERY, C. J.
In this negligence action, the defendant, Mary T. Larson, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a jury trial, in favor of the plaintiff, James Elliott. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) denied her motion for a directed verdict, (2) denied her motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and (3) granted the plaintiffs motion for an additur. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Because the defendant did not accept the court’s additur, a new trial is warranted.
*470The record discloses the following relevant facts and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- RK Constructors, Inc. v. Fusco Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Childs v. BainerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Wichers v. HatchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- R.A. Civitello Co. v. City of New HavenConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- State v. NecaiseConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Fileccia v. Nationwide Property & Casualty InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Turner v. PascarelliConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Smith v. LefebreConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.