Edgecomb v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The plaintiff was injured when, forced toward the outer edge of the sidewalk by an obstruc tion placed thereon by the defendant, she stepped into a depression in the walk. The only error assigned is the granting of the motion to set aside the verdict. The question to be decided is whether the jury could reasonably have found the acts of the defendant to be the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
While the evidence is fairly extensive, there is no serious dispute about the material facts. The defendant operates a super market on the northerly side of Bank Street in New London. A concrete…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Mahoney v. BeatmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Roden v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Kinderavich v. PalmerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Milbury v. Turner Centre SystemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Corey v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Lydia Basko v. Sterling Drug, Inc., and Winthrop LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
- Patricia Johnson v. Teamsters Local 559, Patricia Johnson v. Teamsters Local 559Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
- Collins v. City National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- Miranti v. Brookside Shopping Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- Szela v. Johnson Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.