Housatonic Valley Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Klipstein
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The question determinative of this appeal is whether the subordinate facts support the court’s essential conclusion that the plaintiff was “the predominant efficient procuring cause in bringing this defendant and his purchaser together and causing the sale.” In the assignments of error the defendant seeks to have added to the finding seventeen paragraphs, several of which are included in it in substance, and attacks twenty of the thirty-two paragraphs of the finding as having no evidence to support them. With a few exceptions, in his brief he does not state what particular paragraphs he is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hoadley v. Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Lincoln v. McClatchieSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1869
- Rosenfield v. WallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Murphy v. LinskeySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Schlegal v. AllertonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Staff v. HawkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
- Metz v. Hvass Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Richter v. DrenckhahnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Roche v. CurtinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- Blanchard v. VoghelConnecticut Superior Court · 1943
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.