Staub v. Anderson

211 A.2d 691, 152 Conn. 694, 1965 Conn. LEXIS 545
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedJune 22, 1965
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 211 A.2d 691 (Staub v. Anderson) 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
Staub v. Anderson, 211 A.2d 691, 152 Conn. 694, 1965 Conn. LEXIS 545 (Colo. 1965).

Opinion

Shannon, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment in his favor in an action of replevin for possession of an automobile and for damages after a new trial limited to that issue in accordance with the direction of this court in Staub v. Anderson, 151 Conn. 384, 198 A.2d 207. The defendant had unlawfully obtained and retained possession and use of the plaintiff’s car from November 22, 1960, until it was replevied on May 18, 1961.

The plaintiff waived any claim for loss of use but claimed that he was entitled to the depreciation in the value of his car from the time of taking to the date of the second trial, June 9,1964. The court concluded that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover for depreciation after May 18, 1961, the date of replevin. This conclusion is the only assigned error pursued in the plaintiff’s brief, and so the other errors assigned are treated as abandoned.

Replevin is a purely statutory action. General Statutes § 52-529; M. Itzkowitz & Sons, Inc. v. Santorelli, 128 Conn. 195, 198, 21 A.2d 376. Section 52-515 of the General Statutes authorizes the recovery of damages for such a wrongful detention as occurred in this case. Depreciation in value during the period of detention is a proper element of damages. The right to damages for depreciation in value under the statute ceases upon the termination of the detention, which occurred here on May 18, 1961. Cf. Ralph N. Blakeslee Co. v. Rigo, 94 Conn. 481, 485, 109 A. 173.

There is no error.

In this opinion the other judges concurred.

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

Related

ATC Partnership v. Town of Windham
845 A.2d 389 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2004)
Leasing Tech. Int. v. Uniscribe Prof., No. Cv01 0181875 S (Jul. 23, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 9127 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Rapuano v. Rapuano, No. Cv01 0278120 (Oct. 12, 2001)
2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 14008 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2001)
Cornelio v. Stamford Hospital
717 A.2d 140 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1998)
Cornelio v. Stamford Hospital, No. Cv96 0155779 S (Jul. 21, 1997)
1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 7661 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1997)
Atc Partnership v. Town of Windham, No. Cv 950049838s (Sep. 19, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 10975 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
John Deere Co. v. Presidential Homes, No. 31 16 58 (Feb. 20, 1992)
1992 Conn. Super. Ct. 1413 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1992)
Culligan v. James Erskine Company, No. Cv 91-0323816 (Dec. 10, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 10709 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1991)
Faulkner v. Marineland, Inc.
555 A.2d 1001 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
211 A.2d 691, 152 Conn. 694, 1965 Conn. LEXIS 545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/staub-v-anderson-conn-1965.