Ring's End, Inc. v. Widman, No. Cv00 01791872 S (Aug. 6, 2001)

Connecticut Superior Court

Ring's End, Inc. v. Widman, No. Cv00 01791872 S (Aug. 6, 2001)

2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 10635

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedAugust 6, 2001

DocketNo. CV00 01791872 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 10635 (Ring's End, Inc. v. Widman, No. Cv00 01791872 S (Aug. 6, 2001)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ring's End, Inc. v. Widman, No. Cv00 01791872 S (Aug. 6, 2001), 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 10635 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION This matter comes before the court after referral to a fact finder. The fact finder has issued a written, signed report, and the defendant has filed an objection thereto. See Practice Book § 23-53 through 58.

The facts found by a fact finder are reversible only if they are clearly erroneous. Meadows v. Higgins, 249 Conn. 155, 162 (1999). The court has carefully considered the fact finder's report and the defendant's objection. No transcript of the proceeding before the fact finder has been filed with the court, although the exhibits marked into evidence are in the file.

The court finds no basis for holding the facts found by the fact finder were clearly erroneous. The report of the fact finder shows that the defendant accepted and used goods sold by the plaintiff which had a value of $8,778.09. Deducting a partial payment of $500.00, the report finds that $8,278.09 has not been paid. The defendant contends the finding that he accepted goods worth $8,788.09 constitutes error in that the figure counts the same goods twice. The fact finder, however, clearly found there were two separate transactions.

The court accepts the report of the fact finder. The plaintiff filed an offer of judgment in the amount of $7,000.00 on March 7, 2001, within eighteen months of the filing of the complaint. The offer was not accepted. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to twelve percent interest on the above amount from July 7, 2000 (the date the complaint was filed), plus costs of $288.50. The court also awards $350.00 attorneys fees. See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-192a.

Judgment enters as follows:

$8,278.09

1,077.69 interest (through August 6, 2001)

288.50 costs

350.00 attorneys fees $9,994.28 Total

ADAMS, J. CT Page 10637

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION This matter comes before the court after referral to a fact finder. The fact finder has issued a written, signed report, and the defendant has filed an objection thereto. See Practice Book § 23-53 through 58.

The facts found by a fact finder are reversible only if they are clearly erroneous. Meadows v. Higgins, 249 Conn. 155, 162 (1999). The court has carefully considered the fact finder's report and the defendant's objection. No transcript of the proceeding before the fact finder has been filed with the court, although the exhibits marked into evidence are in the file.

The court finds no basis for holding the facts found by the fact finder were clearly erroneous. The report of the fact finder shows that the defendant accepted and used goods sold by the plaintiff which had a value of $8,778.09. Deducting a partial payment of $500.00, the report finds that $8,278.09 has not been paid. The defendant contends the finding that he accepted goods worth $8,788.09 constitutes error in that the figure counts the same goods twice. The fact finder, however, clearly found there were two separate transactions.

The court accepts the report of the fact finder. The plaintiff filed an offer of judgment in the amount of $7,000.00 on March 7, 2001, within eighteen months of the filing of the complaint. The offer was not accepted. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to twelve percent interest on the above amount from July 7, 2000 (the date the complaint was filed), plus costs of $288.50. The court also awards $350.00 attorneys fees. See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-192a.

Judgment enters as follows:

$8,278.09

1,077.69 interest (through August 6, 2001)

288.50 costs

350.00 attorneys fees $9,994.28 Total

ADAMS, J. CT Page 10637

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 10635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rings-end-inc-v-widman-no-cv00-01791872-s-aug-6-2001-connsuperct-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack