Legal Opinion

Siller v. Philip

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided May 4, 1928PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaines, J.

The appellants moved in the trial court

for numerous and radical changes in the finding of facts; the motion was denied and the same requests are now made in the reasons of appeal to this court. No exceptions were taken to this action of the trial court and it is apparent the appellants seek to base their appeal upon the provisions of General Statutes, §5832, rather than General Statutes, §§5828 to 5831. Whichever method of appeal is adopted, the grounds upon which the requests are made should be stated, either in the motion, the exceptions or the reasons of appeal as the case may be. It is…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Hayward v. PlantSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  2. Dexter Yarn Co. v. American Fabrics Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
  3. Perrotti v. BennettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  4. Allis v. HallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
  5. Basak v. DamutzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Cohn v. DunnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
  2. Truslow Fulle, Inc. v. Diamond Bottling CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
  3. Harris v. ClintonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1955
  4. Wambeck v. LovetriSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
  5. Cyclone Fence Co. v. McAvineySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936

11 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