Solomon v. Shalett
This text of 138 A. 924 (Solomon v. Shalett) 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.
Opinion
Our examination of the evidence has satisfied us that the jury were warranted in finding that the representations as alleged were made and made to induce the plaintiff to indorse a note and re *727 newals thereof which he subsequently had to pay, and that they in fact procured the making of the indorsement. The jury might also reasonably have found that the representations so made were false. Their conclusion was made upon conflicting evidence and since we must find it to have been reasonably reached the verdict must stand. The case is peculiarly one where great weight should be given the decision of the trial judge in refusing to set aside the verdict.
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
138 A. 924, 106 Conn. 726, 1927 Conn. LEXIS 169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solomon-v-shalett-conn-1927.