Legal Opinion

Palmer v. Palmer

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 12, 1927PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Unless the finding be materially corrected it cannot reasonably be claimed that judgment was not properly rendered for the defendant. The plaintiff seeks to have the finding corrected by striking out all the paragraphs of the finding, except a few covering matters that were not in dispute, and by inserting in their place substantially all of the paragraphs of the draft-finding. Such an attempt to procure the substitution of the draft-finding for the entire finding of the court not only violates our rules and practice but awakens the distrust of this court as to the propriety of the appeal.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gallaher v. Southern New , England Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  2. Purcell v. PurcellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
  3. Bagdan v. BagdanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Staff v. HawkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
  2. Tiernan v. Savin Rock Realty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  3. Camarotta v. KlingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
  4. Doe v. DoeConnecticut Superior Court · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API