Suprenant v. Kuhn

673 A.2d 585, 40 Conn. App. 751, 1996 Conn. App. LEXIS 156
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided March 26, 1996·No. 14359·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered for the plaintiffs awarding $2500 damages. They claim that the trial court improperly based its decision on an issue not raised in the pleadings, and abused its discretion in making certain findings. The defendants have failed to present a written memorandum of decision or a transcribed copy of an oral decision signed by the court explaining the factual basis for its decision. See Practice Book § 4059. We have consistently stated that it is the responsibility of the appellant to provide an adequate record for review. Practice Book § 4061; Gelormino v. Blaustein, 31 Conn. App. 750, 751, 626 A.2d 1325 (1993); State v. Rios, 30 Conn. App. 712, 715, 622 A.2d 618 (1993).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Suprenant v. Kuhn, 673 A.2d 585, 40 Conn. App. 751, 1996 Conn. App. LEXIS 156 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).

673 A.2d 585 (Suprenant v. Kuhn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Rios
622 A.2d 618 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1993)
Gelormino v. Blaustein
626 A.2d 1325 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1993)