Heinonen v. Mandracchia

993 A.2d 981, 120 Conn. App. 836, 2010 Conn. App. LEXIS 168
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided May 4, 2010·No. AC 30858·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this negligence action, the plaintiff, Mark Heinonen, appeals from the judgment, rendered after a jury trial, in favor of the defendants, James M. Mandracchia and Cheryl Mandracchia. After a thorough review of the record, transcripts, briefs and oral argument, and affording those claims that properly are before this court careful consideration, we conclude that the plaintiffs claims are without merit.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Heinonen v. Mandracchia, 993 A.2d 981, 120 Conn. App. 836, 2010 Conn. App. LEXIS 168 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010).

993 A.2d 981 (Heinonen v. Mandracchia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

HEINONEN v. Mandracchia
996 A.2d 277 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2010)
HEINONEN v. Mandracchia
993 A.2d 981 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2010)