Legal Opinion
Hayward v. Plant
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 10, 1923PublishedCited by 79 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The appellants seek to correct the finding: (1) By having four paragraphs of the draft-finding added. As we read the evidence, none of these paragraphs, except perhaps the 13th, should have been added, and as its addition cannot affect the disposition of any of the questions raised by the record, it is immaterial whether it be in or out of the finding. (2) By striking out paragraphs 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42 of the finding, which recite the several awards made to the executors as "just, reasonable, and proper compensation" for their services as executors.
A conclusion of this character is an…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Woodward v. . JamesNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of AlbertsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Nolan v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- Mack's Appeal from ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- Main's Appeal From ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- Palumbo v. George A. Fuller Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- State v. SwiftSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Dexter Yarn Co. v. American Fabrics Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Link v. City of SheltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Hoenig v. LubetkinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.