Legal Opinion
Friedman v. Cunningham
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 5, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Per curiam
The plaintiff in this action sought to recover damages for injury done to his automobile in a collision with that of the defendant, which the plaintiff alleged to be due to negligence of the defendant’s servant and agent. The collision occurred at a highway intersection, and defendant’s automobile was upon the right of the plaintiff’s as they came to it. If they were arriving at approximately the same time, it would be the duty of plaintiff’s driver to yield the right of way to the defendant’s automobile. Public Acts of 1921, Chap. 334, § 2; Neumann v. Apter, 95 Conn. 695, 700, 112 Atl. 350;…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Neumann v. ApterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Bettilyon v. C. E. Smith & Son, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Lamke v. Harty Brothers Trucking Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
3Cited by3 opinions
- Service Fire Insurance v. BrodnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- Vecchiarelli v. WeissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- DePalma v. CappellaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968