Notarino v. Powers

Connecticut Appellate Court

Notarino v. Powers

505 A.2d 17, 6 Conn. App. 300

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedFebruary 25, 1986

Docket3734

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 505 A.2d 17 (Notarino v. Powers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Notarino v. Powers, 505 A.2d 17, 6 Conn. App. 300 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff sued the defendant, the commissioner of transportation, for injuries incurred when her motor vehicle went out of control while crossing a wet and slippery bridge in New Haven. After a court trial, the court found that the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care and that her failure to maintain control, rather than any negligence of the defendant, was the proximate cause of the accident. See General Statutes § 13a-144; Patrick v. Burns, 5 Conn. App. 663, 664-65, 502 A.2d 432 (1985). This finding was based on the infrequency of accidents which occurred on this very heavily traveled bridge and on the extensive damage to the plaintiff’s car. See Meyer v. Barnes, 2 Conn. App. 485, 488, 479 A.2d 1236 (1984). Our review of the record indicates that these factual findings are not clearly erroneous and thus cannot be disturbed.

There is no error.

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

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff sued the defendant, the commissioner of transportation, for injuries incurred when her motor vehicle went out of control while crossing a wet and slippery bridge in New Haven. After a court trial, the court found that the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care and that her failure to maintain control, rather than any negligence of the defendant, was the proximate cause of the accident. See General Statutes § 13a-144; Patrick v. Burns, 5 Conn. App. 663, 664-65, 502 A.2d 432 (1985). This finding was based on the infrequency of accidents which occurred on this very heavily traveled bridge and on the extensive damage to the plaintiff’s car. See Meyer v. Barnes, 2 Conn. App. 485, 488, 479 A.2d 1236 (1984). Our review of the record indicates that these factual findings are not clearly erroneous and thus cannot be disturbed.

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

505 A.2d 17, 6 Conn. App. 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/notarino-v-powers-connappct-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack