Fukelman v. City of Middletown
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtFracasse, J.
The plaintiff instituted this action against the defendant city pursuant to General Statutes § 13a-149 for injuries sustained as a result of a fall upon a defective sidewalk. The trial court rendered judgment awarding the plaintiff damages plus costs. The defendant appealed, claiming that the trial court erred: (1) in concluding that the defendant had con*31structive notice of the defect; (2) in concluding that the defect was the sole proximate cause of the injuries; (3) in accepting the testimony of the plaintiff’s doctor; and (4) in awarding costs.
The first, second and third claims of error…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Appliances, Inc. v. YostSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Verrastro v. SivertsenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Damora v. Christ-JanerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Murphy v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Ruhl v. Town of FairfieldConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- Borkowski v. SachetiConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Bowman v. WilliamsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- Giannitti v. City of StamfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Nicefaro v. City of New HavenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.