Carr v. Mehta
540 A.2d 1086, 14 Conn. App. 808, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 181
Opinion
This appeal is an attempt by the defendant to have this court retry the facts found by the trial court. We will not. The defendant also claims that the trial court’s orders are impermissibly vague. We do not agree. Furthermore, any claimed ambiguity could have been clarified for the defendant by the seeking of articulation from the trial court.
There is no error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Carr v. Mehta, 540 A.2d 1086, 14 Conn. App. 808, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 181 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988).
540 A.2d 1086 (Carr v. Mehta) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Roy v. Stephen Pontiac-Cadillac, Inc.
543 A.2d 775 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1988)