Legal Opinion
Forrestt v. Koch
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 22, 2010No. AC 30502PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLYNN, C. J.
The plaintiffs, Frank Forrestt and Carolyn Forrestt, 1 appeal following the denial of their motion to set aside the jury verdict rendered in favor of the defendants, Paul S. Koch, an ophthalmologist, and East Lyme Laser Vision Center, LLP. On appeal, the plaintiffs contend that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to set aside the verdict due to the improper remarks of the defendants’ counsel during his closing argument. They also argue that the prejudicial effect of the remarks was manifest in the short length of the jury’s deliberations. We conclude that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Williams Ford, Inc. v. Hartford Courant Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Gomeau v. ForrestSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Rizzo Pool Co. v. Del GrossoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Skrzypiec v. NoonanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Monti v. WenkertSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ng v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Disciplinary Counsel v. VilleneuveConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- MSO, LLC v. DeSIMONEConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
- Crelan v. CrelanConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Brown v. CartwrightConnecticut Appellate Court · 2021
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.