Opinion
Argued January 5th, 1922
Decided February 21st, 1922.
ACTION to recover money paid for goods sold by sample and upon a warranty, and found on inspection not to conform thereto, brought to and tried by the Superior Court in Hartford County, Haines, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, and appeal by the defendants. No error.
Nathan O. Friedman, for the appellants (defendants).
Henry J. Calnen, for the appellee (plaintiff).
The appeal is confined to a correction of the finding. The first eight assignments of error do not follow our practice; the last six assignments, while not in the most approved form, cannot be said to be void assignments. We have examined the evidence and find no one of the assignments well taken, assuming all were in due form. The appeal seems to us to present no reviewable question.