Mankoski v. Gabianelli

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Mankoski v. Gabianelli

118 A. 925, 98 Conn. 829, 1922 Conn. LEXIS 40

DecidedNovember 1, 1922

StatusPublished

This text of 118 A. 925 (Mankoski v. Gabianelli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mankoski v. Gabianelli, 118 A. 925, 98 Conn. 829, 1922 Conn. LEXIS 40 (Colo. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The errors assigned, that the plaintiff failed to establish the allegations of the complaint by a preponderance of the evidence, and that the court ' assessed the damages improperly, do not arise unless the finding be corrected substantially as claimed by defendant. The evidence relating to these claimed errors, and to all material matters contained in the motion to correct, was conflicting, and in no material finding made, nor in the refusal to find as set forth in the motion to correct, do we find that the trial court erred.

There is no error.

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

Per Curiam.

The errors assigned, that the plaintiff failed to establish the allegations of the complaint by a preponderance of the evidence, and that the court ' assessed the damages improperly, do not arise unless the finding be corrected substantially as claimed by defendant. The evidence relating to these claimed errors, and to all material matters contained in the motion to correct, was conflicting, and in no material finding made, nor in the refusal to find as set forth in the motion to correct, do we find that the trial court erred.

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 A. 925, 98 Conn. 829, 1922 Conn. LEXIS 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mankoski-v-gabianelli-conn-1922.