Gambardella v. City of New Haven

Connecticut Appellate Court

Gambardella v. City of New Haven

537 A.2d 546, 13 Conn. App. 819, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 88

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedFebruary 22, 1988

Docket5686

StatusPublished

This text of 537 A.2d 546 (Gambardella v. City of New Haven) 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

Gambardella v. City of New Haven, 537 A.2d 546, 13 Conn. App. 819, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 88 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s first claim of error is that the defendant’s stop sign, which was improperly located so as to be obscured from view, could not as a matter of law be a highway defect. This claim was not raised in the trial court in any way, and does not qualify for review under the plain error doctrine. The defendant’s second claim of error, namely, that there was insufficient evidence of constructive notice, is without merit.

There is no error.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s first claim of error is that the defendant’s stop sign, which was improperly located so as to be obscured from view, could not as a matter of law be a highway defect. This claim was not raised in the trial court in any way, and does not qualify for review under the plain error doctrine. The defendant’s second claim of error, namely, that there was insufficient evidence of constructive notice, is without merit.

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

537 A.2d 546, 13 Conn. App. 819, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gambardella-v-city-of-new-haven-connappct-1988.