Dombroski v. City of Hartford

Connecticut Appellate Court

Dombroski v. City of Hartford

499 A.2d 431, 5 Conn. App. 431

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedOctober 29, 1985

Docket3597

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 499 A.2d 431 (Dombroski v. City of Hartford) 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

Dombroski v. City of Hartford, 499 A.2d 431, 5 Conn. App. 431 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant city appeals from the judgment of the trial court for the plaintiff awarding her damages for injuries which resulted from a fall on a defective sidewalk. The court issued a detailed and exhaustive memorandum of decision finding all the necessary facts in favor of the plaintiff. We find no error.

The defendant’s first claim, that the court erred in admitting without proper foundation two photographs of the particular defect in the sidewalk, is without merit. The plaintiff testified that the photographs accurately depicted the condition of the sidewalk at the point at which she fell. See Tripp v. Anderson, 1 Conn. App. 433, 435, 472 A.2d 804 (1984). The defendant’s remaining claims of error do no more than attack the trial court’s factual findings, which are not clearly erroneous. See Fukelman v. Middletown, 4 Conn. App. 30, 31, 492 A.2d 214 (1985).

There is no error.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant city appeals from the judgment of the trial court for the plaintiff awarding her damages for injuries which resulted from a fall on a defective sidewalk. The court issued a detailed and exhaustive memorandum of decision finding all the necessary facts in favor of the plaintiff. We find no error.

The defendant’s first claim, that the court erred in admitting without proper foundation two photographs of the particular defect in the sidewalk, is without merit. The plaintiff testified that the photographs accurately depicted the condition of the sidewalk at the point at which she fell. See Tripp v. Anderson, 1 Conn. App. 433, 435, 472 A.2d 804 (1984). The defendant’s remaining claims of error do no more than attack the trial court’s factual findings, which are not clearly erroneous. See Fukelman v. Middletown, 4 Conn. App. 30, 31, 492 A.2d 214 (1985).

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

499 A.2d 431, 5 Conn. App. 431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dombroski-v-city-of-hartford-connappct-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack