Grolock v. Haefenfeldtz

122 A. 925, 99 Conn. 732, 1923 Conn. LEXIS 150
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided November 7, 1923·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The errors assigned are all predicated upon corrections of the finding. We have duly considered the evidence and cannot hold that the court found facts’ or failed to find facts, essential to the judgment, incorrectly. The conclusions of the trial court could have been reasonably reached upon the evidence and the inferences drawn from it.

There is no error.

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

Grolock v. Haefenfeldtz, 122 A. 925, 99 Conn. 732, 1923 Conn. LEXIS 150 (Colo. 1923).

122 A. 925 (Grolock v. Haefenfeldtz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.