Legal Opinion
Roberto v. Honeywell, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided September 17, 1996No. 14870PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHennessy, J.
This negligence action arises from an automobile collision in October, 1988. The matter was first tried to a jury in 1992 and resulted in a verdict for the defendants. The plaintiff appealed from the judgment, and we reversed the trial court and remanded the case for a new trial. Roberto v. Honeywell, Inc., 33 Conn. App. 619, 637 A.2d 405, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 909, 642 A.2d 1205 (1994). After a new trial, the jury returned a verdict for the defendants, and the trial court denied the plaintiffs motions to set aside and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. This appeal ensued. On appeal,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Berry v. LoiseauSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Aspiazu v. OrgeraSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- DeCarufel v. Colonial Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1955
- Obermeier v. NielsenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- Ellice v. INA Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kelley v. TomasConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- State v. ToccoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Mann v. ReganConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- Mezes v. MeadConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Mattie & O'Brien Contracting Co. v. Rizzo Construction Pool Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.