Agacinski v. City of Meriden

10 Conn. Super. Ct. 25
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedOctober 7, 1941
DocketFile No. 61040
StatusPublished

This text of 10 Conn. Super. Ct. 25 (Agacinski v. City of Meriden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Agacinski v. City of Meriden, 10 Conn. Super. Ct. 25 (Colo. Ct. App. 1941).

Opinion

The complaint alleges in substance that the injury was caused by a defective condition of a sidewalk made "more dangerous and defective .... due to an accumulation of ice and snow ...." and, later in the complaint, that "as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid defective condition of the sidewalk" the plaintiff was injured.

The complaint is general enough to support recovery for an injury arising out of the condition of the pavement with snow and ice not an essential contributory cause and the defective condition the real proximate cause. Frechette vs. Cityof New Haven, 104 Conn. 83, 90, 91.

The demurrer is therefore overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Frechette v. City of New Haven
132 A. 467 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Conn. Super. Ct. 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/agacinski-v-city-of-meriden-connsuperct-1941.