Farkas v. Sadler

368 A.2d 1251, 117 R.I. 958, 1976 R.I. LEXIS 1834
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided December 20, 1976·No. Appeal No. 75-30·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Case is assigned to the calendar for February 7, 1977, 9:30 a.m. for oral argument. The plaintiff will be expected to show cause why his appeal should not be summarily disposed of because of this Court’s previous statement that in situations such as this the court will not disturb a finding of the trial justice unless he was clearly wrong. Labree v. Major 111, R.I. 657, 306 A.2d 808 (1973). He should also be prepared to discuss in what man[959]*959ner the trial justice overlooked or misconceived material evidence on a material point and was clearly wrong. Malinowski v. Zalzal, 113 R.I. 90, 317 A.2d 875 (1974).

Adam Farkas, pro se, plaintiff. Keenan, Bice, Dolan, Reardon & Kiernan, James A. Currier, Hanson, Curran, Bowen & Parks, Kenneth R. Neal, for defendants.

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

Farkas v. Sadler, 368 A.2d 1251, 117 R.I. 958, 1976 R.I. LEXIS 1834 (R.I. 1976).

368 A.2d 1251 (Farkas v. Sadler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cacchillo v. LEACH MACHINERY COMPANY
368 A.2d 1251 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1976)