From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farrell v. Johnson & Johnson

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Nov 20, 2018
330 Conn. 944 (Conn. 2018)

Opinion

11-20-2018

Mary Beth FARRELL et al. v. JOHNSON AND JOHNSON et al.

Brenden P. Leydon, Stamford, in support of the petition. David J. Robertson and Nancy M. Marini, Bridgeport, in opposition.


The plaintiffs' petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 184 Conn.App. 685, 195 A.3d 1152 (2018), is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the trial court did not improperly rule that the journal articles, offered to prove notice, were inadmissible as hearsay?

"2. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the theory of innocent misrepresentation is not applicable in the present case and that the trial court properly directed a verdict in favor of the defendants on this claim?"


Summaries of

Farrell v. Johnson & Johnson

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Nov 20, 2018
330 Conn. 944 (Conn. 2018)
Case details for

Farrell v. Johnson & Johnson

Case Details

Full title:Mary Beth FARRELL et al. v. JOHNSON AND JOHNSON et al.

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Nov 20, 2018

Citations

330 Conn. 944 (Conn. 2018)
197 A.3d 389

Citing Cases

Farrell v. Johnson & Johnson

And "[d]id the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the theory of innocent misrepresentation is not…