From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Suprenant v. Kuhn

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Mar 26, 1996
673 A.2d 585 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996)

Opinion

(14359)

Argued February 20, 1996

Decision released March 26, 1996

Action to recover damages for alleged misrepresentation in the sale of certain personal property, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Middlesex and tried to the court, Stanley, J.; judgment for the plaintiffs, from which the defendants appealed to this court. Affirmed.

Bruce A. Chaplin, with whom, on the brief, was Tania Schmidt-Alpers, law student intern, for the appellants (defendants).

Charlotte Croman, for the appellees (plaintiffs).


The defendants appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered for the plaintiffs awarding $2500 damages. They claim that the trial court improperly based its decision on an issue not raised in the pleadings, and abused its discretion in making certain findings. The defendants have failed to present a written memorandum of decision or a transcribed copy of an oral decision signed by the court explaining the factual basis for its decision. See Practice Book § 4059. We have consistently stated that it is the responsibility of the appellant to provide an adequate record for review. Practice Book § 4061; Gelormino v. Blaustein, 31 Conn. App. 750, 751, 626 A.2d 1325 (1993); State v. Rios, 30 Conn. App. 712, 715, 622 A.2d 618 (1993).


Summaries of

Suprenant v. Kuhn

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Mar 26, 1996
673 A.2d 585 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996)
Case details for

Suprenant v. Kuhn

Case Details

Full title:LEONARD SUPRENANT ET AL. v. EDWARD K. KUHN ET AL

Court:Appellate Court of Connecticut

Date published: Mar 26, 1996

Citations

673 A.2d 585 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996)
40 Conn. App. 751