From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Amore v. Frankel

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Feb 11, 1993
621 A.2d 286 (Conn. 1993)

Opinion

(14689)

Decided February 11, 1993


The defendant commissioner's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 565 [AC 10677], is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Does the duty of the commissioner of transportation to maintain highways, bridges and sidewalks under General Statutes 13a-144 extend to driveways?

"2. Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the trial court's dismissal of this action on the basis that the complaint stated a cause of action under General Statutes 13a-144, notwithstanding the affidavits of the defendant indicating that the defendant had no duty to keep the area in question in repair?"


Michael O'Sullivan, in support of the petition.

Robert J. Enright, in opposition.


Summaries of

Amore v. Frankel

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Feb 11, 1993
621 A.2d 286 (Conn. 1993)
Case details for

Amore v. Frankel

Case Details

Full title:ALAN AMORE ET AL. v. EMIL FRANKEL, COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Feb 11, 1993

Citations

621 A.2d 286 (Conn. 1993)
621 A.2d 286

Citing Cases

Amore v. Frankel

We certified the following questions: "(1) Does the duty of the commissioner of transportation to maintain…