Legal Opinion

Canfield Rubber Co. v. Leary

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 1, 1923PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeach, J.

Taking, first, the ruling on the motion to set aside the verdict as against the evidence. It is not denied that there was legally sufficient evidence of one or more of the specifications of negligence alleged in the complaint. The motion was based, as appears from the memorandum of decision on the motion and from the appellants’ brief, on two claims of law, which also underlie other assignments of error, as to the legal duty of the defendants in conducting excavations in the highway, and as to the legal duty of the plaintiff to protect its own buildings, after having had timely notice —…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Gilmore v. DriscollMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
  2. Thurston v. HancockMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
  3. Aaronson v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  4. Walker v. StrosniderWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Freedman v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Belchak v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
  2. Arborio v. Hartford Electric Light Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  3. Cackowski v. Jack A. Halprin, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
  4. Vennard v. MorrisonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1964
  5. Pappageorge v. RosaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954

2 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