Kerpa v. A & A Bros.

534 A.2d 918, 13 Conn. App. 807
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided December 22, 1987·No. 5406·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff’s first, second and sixth claims of error were not raised in the trial court; consequently, we will not consider those claims. The plaintiff’s third, fourth and fifth elaims of error invoke the discretionary function of the court. Our review of the record, transcript and briefs fails to disclose any abuse of such discretion.

There is no error.

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

Kerpa v. A & A Bros., 534 A.2d 918, 13 Conn. App. 807 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987).

534 A.2d 918 (Kerpa v. A & A Bros.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kerpa v. A & A Bros.
541 A.2d 1238 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1988)