Legal Opinion
Olshefski v. Stenner
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided December 10, 1991No. 9887PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDaly, J.
The named defendant and his defendant corporation1 appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for injuries the plaintiff sustained while on the premises of the defendants’ tavern. The defendants claim that the trial court incorrectly instructed the jury as to (1) the nature and the scope of the plaintiff’s duty to exercise care for her own safety, (2) the definition of proximate causation and (3) the scope of the duty owed to business patrons of the defendants’ tavern. We agree with the defendants on their first claim and therefore reverse the judgment.
The jury could reasonably have…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Pisel v. Stamford HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Canaan Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Mei v. Alterman Transport Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
- Borsoi v. SparicoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Hoelter v. Mohawk Service, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Belanger v. Village Pub I, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Demarkey v. FratturoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- Naughton v. HagerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Mazzotta v. Raymond, No. 62579 (Jun. 23, 1992)Connecticut Superior Court · 1992