Legal Opinion

Automotive Twins, Inc. v. Klein

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 5, 1951PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtIncus, J.

The assignments of error in this case are directed to an order dropping a defendant, to the rendering of judgment upon default against the named defendant, to the denial of his motion to open that judgment and to claimed errors in the charge to the jury on the hearing in damages.

The substitute complaint was in two counts. The first rested on a claim for compensation for repairs made upon the defendant’s Lincoln automobile. The second alleged that the plaintiff loaned a Ford automobile to the defendant and that it was damaged while in his possession. The defendant entered his appearance pro se…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Schoonmaker v. Albertson & Douglass Machine Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
  2. Puleo v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
  3. Barton v. BartonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  4. Seeley v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
  5. Lennon v. RawitzerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Slattery v. MaykutSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
  2. Cannavo Enterprises, Inc. v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  3. Pantlin & Chananie Development Corp. v. Hartford Cement & Building Supply Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  4. Jaconski v. AMF, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  5. Ratner v. WillametzConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987

54 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