Legal Opinion
McNulty v. the Sherman Realty Corporation
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 5, 1937PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The jury could reasonably have found the following facts: The plaintiff lived with her husband and daughter on the third floor of an eight-tenement house belonging to the defendant. The stairway leading from the second to the first or ground floor was in good structural condition and was provided with adequate electric lighting fixtures and a hand rail. Due to unprecedented flood conditions, electric service was interrupted at 1.04 a.m. on March 20th, 1936, and was not resumed until 10.30 a.m. on March 31st, 1936. On the evening of March 25th, 1936, the plaintiff left her home to go to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Roma v. Thames River Specialties Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
- Porcello v. FinnanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Schroeder v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Iudica v. DenezzoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Micca v. ParentiniSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
3Cited by7 opinions
- Fogarty v. M. J. Beuchler & Son, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Scorpion v. American-Republican, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- Falzone v. GrunerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
- Dillon v. TarantinoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1962
- Maitz v. LulewiczSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.