Legal Opinion

Frohlich v. City of New Haven

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 27, 1932PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.

Upon the evidence the jury could have found that on and for a time after February 2d, 1931, the sidewalk where the plaintiff fell on February 9th was covered by packed snow and patches of ice; they could not reasonably have found otherwise than that by February 7th the condition had been reduced to small patches of ice at various places on the walk. The jury, if acting reasonably, must have found, also, that between four-fifty p. m. on February 7th and four a. m on February 8th there fell a total of about three inches of snow, and that between six a. m. and nine p. m. of February 8th there…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hennessy v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1902
  2. McKiernan v. LehmaierSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
  3. Ritter v. City of SheltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
  4. Schroeder v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
  5. Kristiansen v. City of DanburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Amelchenko v. Borough of FreeholdSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
  2. Wadlund v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
  3. Fonck v. Town of StratfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
  4. Kowalewski v. Mutual Loan Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
  5. Bazinet v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949

12 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