U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. K.J. Enterprises, Inc.

563 A.2d 1386, 19 Conn. App. 806, 1989 Conn. App. LEXIS 282
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided July 19, 1989·No. 6466·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff instituted this action against the defendants for breach of an indemnity agreement and to set aside certain conveyances of property as fraudulent. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and an award of attorneys fees and expenses, the defendant has appealed.

The defendant raises ten claims of error on appeal that attack either the court’s factual findings or its exercise of discretion. We have fully reviewed each of the defendant’s claims and conclude that the court’s findings are not clearly erroneous, and that its actions were clearly within its discretion. See Della Pietra v. American Factors, Inc., 18 Conn. App. 812, 556 A.2d 1064 (1989).

There is no error.

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

U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. K.J. Enterprises, Inc., 563 A.2d 1386, 19 Conn. App. 806, 1989 Conn. App. LEXIS 282 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

563 A.2d 1386 (U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. K.J. Enterprises, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Peters v. Pearl
655 A.2d 262 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1995)
Star Enterprise v. Hanna
635 A.2d 889 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1994)
Petro v. Petro
626 A.2d 791 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1993)
National Iron Bank v. Gelormino
609 A.2d 666 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1992)
Sparks v. Koshefsky
598 A.2d 146 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1991)
State v. Lombardo
582 A.2d 922 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1990)
U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. K.J. Enters., Inc.
565 A.2d 538 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1989)