Tucker v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.

509 A.2d 1059, 7 Conn. App. 554, 1986 Conn. App. LEXIS 998
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided June 3, 1986·No. 4063·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This case was tried to a jury, which returned a verdict for the defendant on the first count, [555] and the court directed a verdict for the defendant on the second count. The plaintiff did not move to set aside the verdicts thereby limiting our review to the standard of plain error. Practice Book § 3063; Pietrorazio v. Santopietro, 185 Conn. 510, 513-16, 441 A.2d 163 (1981); Eagar v. Barron, 2 Conn. App. 468, 472, 480 A.2d 576 (1984).

Our review of the record, transcripts and briefs submitted in this case and our analysis of only those claims of error raised by the plaintiff that are properly before us fail to indicate that the trial court committed plain error with regard to any such claims.

There is no error.

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

Tucker v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 509 A.2d 1059, 7 Conn. App. 554, 1986 Conn. App. LEXIS 998 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).

509 A.2d 1059 (Tucker v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pietrorazio v. Santopietro
441 A.2d 163 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1981)
Eagar v. Barron
480 A.2d 576 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1984)