From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holmes v. New London

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Dec 8, 1953
101 A.2d 302 (Conn. 1953)

Opinion

Argued October 13, 1953

Decided December 8, 1953

Action to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by a defective sidewalk, brought to the Superior Court in New London County and tried to the court, Murphy, J.; judgment for the plaintiff and appeal by the defendant. No error.

Edmund J. Eshenfelder, for the appellant (defendant).

Francis F. McGuire, with whom, on the brief, was Morgan K. McGuire, for the appellee (plaintiff).


All of the claims raised on this appeal have basis only if the finding can be corrected. The conclusions of the trial court are legally drawn from the facts as it found them. To interfere with the conclusions would be to substitute different findings of fact. This cannot be done where there is evidence upon which reasoning minds might disagree. Here there is no basis for correcting the finding. This being so, the conclusions must stand.


Summaries of

Holmes v. New London

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Dec 8, 1953
101 A.2d 302 (Conn. 1953)
Case details for

Holmes v. New London

Case Details

Full title:FRANCES L. HOLMES v. CITY OF NEW LONDON

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Dec 8, 1953

Citations

101 A.2d 302 (Conn. 1953)
101 A.2d 302

Citing Cases

Katz v. Martin

This cannot be done where there is evidence upon which reasoning minds might disagree. Holmes v. New London,…

Cassella v. Allen

This being so, the conclusions must stand." Holmes v. New London, 140 Conn. 477, 478; City Bank Trust Co. v.…