Legal Opinion
Ranney v. Rock
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 26, 1949PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtElls, J.
The issue is whether the subordinate facts support the trial court’s conclusion that the plaintiff, a real estate broker, was not the procuring cause of the sale of the defendant’s property.
The question is one of fact for the trial court, and its judgment is conclusive unless contrary to or unsupported by the subordinate facts or in conflict with the settled rules of logic and reason or found in violation of some rule or principle of law. Neville v. Yaknunas, 132 Conn. 627, 630, 46 A. 2d 342. Upon this basis the conclusion reached may be reviewed by us; Ritch v. Robertson, 93 Conn. 459, 463,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Rosenfield v. WallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Housatonic Valley Insurance Agency, Inc. v. KlipsteinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Jordan v. HilbertSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1932
- Fisher v. HansonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Ritch v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- E. A. Strout Realty Agency, Inc. v. WoosterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1953
- Richter v. DrenckhahnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Pentin v. GonsowskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- Zaniewski v. MancinoneConnecticut Superior Court · 1981
- Benrus Watch Co. v. RosengartenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.