Coppedge v. Travis
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtBright, J.
The defendant dog owner, Curtis Travis, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a trial to the court, in favor of the plaintiff, Camila Coppedge, in this tort action, commenced pursuant to General Statutes (Rev. to 2013) § 22-357, 1 commonly known as the dog bite statute. On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) "[t]he evidence supports a finding that ... § 22-357 does not apply as the dog's conduct was innocent," and (2) "[t]he evidence does not support a finding of proximate cause." We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
On the basis of the evidence presented at…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Malone v. SteinbergSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
- Perricone v. PerriconeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Granniss v. WeberSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Murphy v. BuonatoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Murphy v. BuonatoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wager v. MooreConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019
- Hill v. OSJ of Bloomfield, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020
- Crouzet v. First Baptist Church of StoningtonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020