Sipp v. Sipp

197 A.2d 73, 151 Conn. 705
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided January 7, 1964·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant has appealed from a judgment granting the plaintiff, his wife, a legal separation on the ground of intolerable cruelty and awarding her custody of and support for two of their three minor children and alimony. The defendant seeks to substitute 181 paragraphs of his oversized 305-paragraph draft finding for 52 of the 166 paragraphs of facts found by the court. In effect, he is attempting to retry the case on appeal. This practice has been repeatedly discouraged. Ball v. Branford, 142 Conn. 13, 15, 110 A.2d 459. The minor corrections to which he is entitled will not change the result. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Murray, 145 Conn. 427, 429, 143 A.2d 646.

There is no error.

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

Sipp v. Sipp, 197 A.2d 73, 151 Conn. 705 (Colo. 1964).

197 A.2d 73 (Sipp v. Sipp) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dombrowski v. Dombrowski
362 A.2d 907 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1975)
McLaughlin v. Chicken Delight, Inc.
321 A.2d 456 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1973)
Cecio Bros., Inc. v. Feldmann
287 A.2d 374 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1971)
Kobryn v. Kobryn
244 A.2d 411 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1968)
Taylor v. Taylor
225 A.2d 196 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1966)