Legal Opinion

Paskewicz v. Hickey

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 31, 1930PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaines, J.

The first assignment of error is the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to set aside the verdict. We accord much weight to the views of the trial judge under these circumstances, and in determining whether his action was justified, we give the defendant’s evidence the most favorable interpretation which can fairly and reasonably be put upon it. Thus considered, the jury could reasonably have found that about half past ten on the evening of September 29th, 1928, an automobile driven by the defendant Daniel F. B. Hickey and owned by his wife, who, with Mrs. McHugh, was with him in the car, was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fine v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1918
  2. Hizam v. BlackmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
  3. Sacks v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1929

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Correnti v. CatinoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  2. Puza v. HamwaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  3. Barbieri v. PandiscioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  4. Caplan v. ArndtSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
  5. Rosen v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API