Legal Opinion
Lomazzo v. King
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 16, 1951PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Sullivan, J.
The plaintiff brought suit to recover an unpaid balance claimed to be due from the defendants for work performed and materials furnished. The answer alleged payment. Judgment was entered for the defendants on the complaint and the plaintiff has appealed.
It is unnecessary to recite the facts, which amply support the court’s decisive conclusions as to the existing contract and payment in full by the defendants. The effort to change the facts by correcting the finding is futile in the absence of a transcript of the evidence. Lusas v. St. Patrick’s Roman Catholic Church Corporation, 125 Conn.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gray v. GreenblattSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Lusas v. St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Church Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc. v. ElionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Squires v. KilgoreSupreme Court of Florida · 1926
- Meyer v. ReichardtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hampton v. StruveNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
- Fitzgerald v. Knapp Bros., Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1976
- Fitzgerald v. Knapp Bros., Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1976
- Seldin v. SandeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1960