Rubin v. Valentino Trucking, Inc.
520 A.2d 234, 9 Conn. App. 818
This text of 520 A.2d 234 (Rubin v. Valentino Trucking, Inc.) 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
Rubin v. Valentino Trucking, Inc., 520 A.2d 234, 9 Conn. App. 818 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987).
Opinion
The defendants claim error in the findings of an attorney trial referee. The defendants did not object in the trial court to those findings. See Practice Book § 440; Ruhl v. Fairfield, 5 Conn. App. 104, 496 A.2d 994 (1985).
There is no error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Ruhl v. Town of Fairfield
496 A.2d 994 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
520 A.2d 234, 9 Conn. App. 818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rubin-v-valentino-trucking-inc-connappct-1987.