Legal Opinion

Lanfare v. Putnam

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 5, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, C. J.

This is an action by a pedestrian to recover damages resulting from being run into by an automobile driven by the defendant, while she was crossing a city street. The defendant offered no evidence except upon the matter of damages and consequently the finding states only the facts as to liability which the plaintiff claimed to have proved. These are in brief as follows: The plaintiff, then about sixty-eight years of age, started to cross a one-way street in New Haven at a crossing which pedestrians were accustomed to use, at about five o’clock in the afternoon of January 5th, 1931, while it…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Correnti v. CatinoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  2. McLaughlin v. SchreiberSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Cote v. PalmerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
  2. Sherman v. William M. Ryan & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
  3. Strong v. CarrierSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  4. Kulinski v. SavinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
  5. Kilday v. VoltzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API