O'Dell v. Kozee
This text of 28 A.3d 343 (O'Dell v. Kozee) 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.
Opinion
John A. O'DELL, Administrator (Estate of Patrick O'Dell)
v.
Kenneth KOZEE et al.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Ron Murphy, New Britain, in support of the petition.
Elycia D. Solimene, Middletown, in opposition.
The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 128 Conn.App. 794, 19 A.3d 672, is granted, limited to the following issues:
"1. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that General Statutes § 30-102 requires visible proof of intoxication?
"2. If the answer to question one is affirmative, did the Appellate Court properly determine that the case should be remanded and dismissed when the trial court has issued a ruling prior to trial that the plaintiff did not have to prove visible intoxication?"
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
28 A.3d 343, 302 Conn. 928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odell-v-kozee-conn-2011.