Legal Opinion

Brody v. Dickie

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 13, 1923PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWolfe, J.

The plaintiff, in the first instance, seeks a correction of the finding of the trial court by having certain paragraphs stricken out and certain other paragraphs added. This court has repeatedly stated that it “will not correct a finding of facts unless the record discloses that it includes matters found to be facts without evidence, or fails to include material facts which were admitted or undisputed. The determination of the trial court on conflicting evidence, or on the weight or effect of evidence, will not be disturbed.” Hayward v. Plant, 98 Conn. 374, 379, 119 Atl. 341, 343; Hine v.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hayward v. PlantSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  2. Hine v. McNerneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
  3. Kuchler v. StaffordAppellate Court of Illinois · 1914

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Puza v. HamwaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  2. Burk v. CorradoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  3. Dole v. LublinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
  4. Handlon v. HenshawSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API