From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fisk v. Town of Redding

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 26, 2019
332 Conn. 911 (Conn. 2019)

Opinion

06-26-2019

Gregg FISK v. TOWN OF REDDING et al.

Thomas R. Gerarde, Hartford, in support of the petition. A. Reynolds Gordon and Frank A. DeNicola, Jr., Stamford, in opposition.


Thomas R. Gerarde, Hartford, in support of the petition.

A. Reynolds Gordon and Frank A. DeNicola, Jr., Stamford, in opposition.

The named defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 190 Conn. App. 99, 210 A.3d 73 (2019), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the jury's verdict should be set aside because the jury's response to the first special interrogatory, that the condition of an unfenced retaining wall was inherently dangerous, was fatally inconsistent with its response to the third special interrogatory, that the defendant's use of the land nevertheless was not unreasonable?"


Summaries of

Fisk v. Town of Redding

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 26, 2019
332 Conn. 911 (Conn. 2019)
Case details for

Fisk v. Town of Redding

Case Details

Full title:Gregg FISK v. TOWN OF REDDING et al.

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Jun 26, 2019

Citations

332 Conn. 911 (Conn. 2019)
209 A.3d 645

Citing Cases

Fisk v. Town of Redding

This court granted the defendant's petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following question:…