Legal Opinion
Phenning v. Silansky
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 22, 1957PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Sullivan, J.
In this action the plaintiff sought to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been caused by the defendant’s negligence. After the jury had returned a plaintiff’s verdict, the court set it aside. The plaintiff has appealed, assigning, as the sole error, the court’s ruling on the verdict.
The only ground advanced by the defendant in his motion was that the verdict was against the evidence. Nevertheless, the court set the verdict aside because of an error in the charge. This was within the power of the court. It was not limited to what was alleged in the motion. Munson v. Atwood, 108 Conn.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Honea v. City Dairy, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Minicozzi v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
- Munson v. AtwoodSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Long v. Savin Rock Amusement Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Doyle v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Annamarie Lamontagne, Doreen A. Festa and Susan B. Pregler v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Jonap v. SilverConnecticut Appellate Court · 1983
- Warren v. StancliffSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
- Farlow v. Andrews CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
- Hartmann v. Black & Decker Manufacturing Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.