Matza v. Matza

614 A.2d 824, 223 Conn. 915, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 309
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided September 17, 1992·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 27 Conn. App. 769, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Having found that the trial court improperly denied the defendant a hearing before granting her lawyer’s motion to withdraw in the midst of trial, should the Appellate Court have simply ordered a new trial?
Wesley W. Horton and Alexandra Davis, in support of the petition. C. Ian McLachlan, in opposition. Decided September 17, 1992
“2. In a dissolution case, is a challenge to a ruling moot merely because the appellant does not make a general attack on the financial awards?
“3. May the trial court make an adverse inference against a defendant who rests at the end of the plaintiffs case without testifying?
“4. Should the Appellate Court have ruled on the mistrial issue?”

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

Matza v. Matza, 614 A.2d 824, 223 Conn. 915, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 309 (Colo. 1992).

614 A.2d 824 (Matza v. Matza) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matza v. Matza
627 A.2d 414 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1993)