Pellegrino Di Leo v. Filippo Catanzaro

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Pellegrino Di Leo v. Filippo Catanzaro

115 A. 925, 96 Conn. 725, 1921 Conn. LEXIS 141

DecidedNovember 30, 1921

StatusPublished

This text of 115 A. 925 (Pellegrino Di Leo v. Filippo Catanzaro) 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

Pellegrino Di Leo v. Filippo Catanzaro, 115 A. 925, 96 Conn. 725, 1921 Conn. LEXIS 141 (Colo. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Examination of the evidence shows that the motion to correct the finding is almost in its entirety wholly without merit; the rest of the motion is without significance and, if granted, could not affect the questions of law involved in the appeal. Unless the finding be corrected the claimed errors of law, as the appellant concedes, cannot be successfully pursued.

There is no error.

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

Per Curiam.

Examination of the evidence shows that the motion to correct the finding is almost in its entirety wholly without merit; the rest of the motion is without significance and, if granted, could not affect the questions of law involved in the appeal. Unless the finding be corrected the claimed errors of law, as the appellant concedes, cannot be successfully pursued.

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A. 925, 96 Conn. 725, 1921 Conn. LEXIS 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pellegrino-di-leo-v-filippo-catanzaro-conn-1921.