From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Byrne v. Trice

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Mar 23, 1976
365 A.2d 1063 (Conn. 1976)

Opinion

Argued March 3, 1976

Decision released March 23, 1976

Action to recover damages for personal injuries, allegedly caused by the negligence of the defendant, brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County and tried to the jury before Mignone, J.; judgment for the plaintiff Monica M. Kelly as against the defendant, and judgment for the defendant as against the named plaintiff, from which judgment the named plaintiff appealed. No error.

Mary V. McCarthy, for the appellant (named plaintiff).

Joseph F. Skelley, Jr., with whom, on the brief, was Joel J. Rottner, for the appellee (defendant).


The plaintiff has appealed from the judgment rendered on a jury verdict for the defendant in a negligence action arising from an intersection collision between the plaintiff's automobile and a truck operated by the defendant. The principal issues decided by the verdict were the claims of negligence on the part of the plaintiff and the defendant's claims of contributory negligence pleaded by way of special defense. Counsel for the named plaintiff on the appeal was not trial counsel and the appeal can best be categorized as a valiant but futile effort to retry the case in this court, pressing claims never presented to the trial court, claims of error in rulings to which no objection was raised at the trial and claims of error in the court's charge to which no exceptions were taken and as to which no requests to charge were filed. No novel principles of law or appellate procedure are involved and to discuss seriatim the plaintiff's numerous groundless claims of error would serve no good purpose.


Summaries of

Byrne v. Trice

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Mar 23, 1976
365 A.2d 1063 (Conn. 1976)
Case details for

Byrne v. Trice

Case Details

Full title:ELLEN M. BYRNE ET AL. v. URA DONALD TRICE

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Mar 23, 1976

Citations

365 A.2d 1063 (Conn. 1976)
365 A.2d 1063

Citing Cases

Zoning Insp. of Redding v. Plunske

No novel principles of law or appellate procedure are involved in this case and to discuss the defendant's…

Titus v. Chappell Express, Inc.

The defendants had the burden of proof on the issue of contributory negligence. Malone v. Santora, 135 Conn.…