Rosenberg v. Ganz

114 A. 659, 96 Conn. 469
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedJuly 5, 1921
StatusPublished

This text of 114 A. 659 (Rosenberg v. Ganz) 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
Rosenberg v. Ganz, 114 A. 659, 96 Conn. 469 (Colo. 1921).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The conclusion of the trial court, that the common-law bond sued on was not in force because the plaintiff had voluntarily accepted in its stead a statutory form of bond with a more acceptable surety, is an *471 inference of fact logically consistent with the subordinate facts found. Assuming that the original common-law bond was at one time in force and effect, the plaintiff appears to have consented to the substitution of another bond, not sued on.

The assignments of érror based on rulings on evidence, and on refusals to correct the findings, are not pursued on the brief, and we are unable to see that the appeal presents any issue of law.

There is no error.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 A. 659, 96 Conn. 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenberg-v-ganz-conn-1921.