Computerworks, Inc. v. Board of Education

Connecticut Appellate Court

Computerworks, Inc. v. Board of Education

757 A.2d 1136, 59 Conn. App. 543, 2000 Conn. App. LEXIS 414

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedAugust 22, 2000

DocketAC 19466

StatusPublished

This text of 757 A.2d 1136 (Computerworks, Inc. v. Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Computerworks, Inc. v. Board of Education, 757 A.2d 1136, 59 Conn. App. 543, 2000 Conn. App. LEXIS 414 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The controlling issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly rendered judgment dismissing the second count of the plaintiffs complaint. The sole reference to the second count in the trial court’s memorandum of decision is as follows: “The plaintiffs argument that the second count should survive a motion to dismiss is unavailing.” The plaintiff did not seek an articulation of this naked declaration.

“Under these circumstances, we . . . are left to surmise or speculate as to the existence of a factual predicate for the trial court’s rulings. Our role is not to guess at possibilities, but to review claims based on a complete factual record developed by the trial court. . . . Without the necessary factual and legal conclusions [544]*544furnished by the trial court . . . any decision made by us respecting [the plaintiffs claim] would be entirely speculative.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Chase Manhattan Bank/City Trust v. AECO Elevator Co., 48 Conn. App. 605, 608, 710 A.2d 190 (1998), quoting Alix v. Leech, 45 Conn. App. 1, 5, 692 A.2d 1309 (1997). “The duty to provide this court with a record adequate for review rests with the appellant. Practice Book § 60-5 . . . .” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lombardi v. Lombardi, 55 Conn. App. 117, 118, 737 A.2d 988 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 943, 747 A.2d 520 (2000).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The controlling issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly rendered judgment dismissing the second count of the plaintiffs complaint. The sole reference to the second count in the trial court’s memorandum of decision is as follows: “The plaintiffs argument that the second count should survive a motion to dismiss is unavailing.” The plaintiff did not seek an articulation of this naked declaration.

“Under these circumstances, we . . . are left to surmise or speculate as to the existence of a factual predicate for the trial court’s rulings. Our role is not to guess at possibilities, but to review claims based on a complete factual record developed by the trial court. . . . Without the necessary factual and legal conclusions [544]*544furnished by the trial court . . . any decision made by us respecting [the plaintiffs claim] would be entirely speculative.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Chase Manhattan Bank/City Trust v. AECO Elevator Co., 48 Conn. App. 605, 608, 710 A.2d 190 (1998), quoting Alix v. Leech, 45 Conn. App. 1, 5, 692 A.2d 1309 (1997). “The duty to provide this court with a record adequate for review rests with the appellant. Practice Book § 60-5 . . . .” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lombardi v. Lombardi, 55 Conn. App. 117, 118, 737 A.2d 988 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 943, 747 A.2d 520 (2000).

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

757 A.2d 1136, 59 Conn. App. 543, 2000 Conn. App. LEXIS 414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/computerworks-inc-v-board-of-education-connappct-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack