Legal Opinion
Bordonaro v. Senk
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 10, 1929PublishedCited by 106 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
The injuries for which the plaintiff sues arose out of a collision between a truck and an automobile driven by the defendant in which the plaintiff was a nonpaying guest. The appeal from the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to set aside the verdict cannot be sustained. There was a decided conflict in the evidence offered by the parties; the jury might reasonably have found in favor of the defendants. The defendants’ case is not in conflict with the indisputable physical facts, as the plaintiff contends; hence the defendants’ case does not fall within Budaj v. Connecticut Co., 108 Conn. 474,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Silver v. SilverSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Gonier v. Chase Companies, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Nehring v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
- Menzie v. KalmonowitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Pitkin v. New York & New England RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by106 opinions
- Dubay v. IrishSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- State v. RoqueSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Universal Concrete Pipe Co. v. BassettOhio Supreme Court · 1936
- Markey v. SantangeloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Ziman v. WhitleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.