Vaine v. Exxon Co. USA, No. 279465 (Nov. 25, 1994)

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 11788
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided November 25, 1994·No. No. 279465·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]ORDER "The issue of proximate cause is ordinarily a question of fact for the trier." Maebry v. McNeil, 13 Conn. App. 167, 169 (1988). Here, the trier reasonably could have found that the plaintiff's lighting a cigarette in his automobile after having had gasoline spilled on him, rather than any negligence of the defendant resulting in the spillage itself, was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's ensuing injuries. Cf. Courtney v.American Oil Co., 229 So.2d 675 (Fla.App. 1968), reh. denied.

The objections to the report of the attorney trial referee are overruled. Judgment may enter on the report.

Bruce L. Levin Judge of the Superior Court

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

Vaine v. Exxon Co. USA, No. 279465 (Nov. 25, 1994), 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 11788 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 11788 (Vaine v. Exxon Co. USA, No. 279465 (Nov. 25, 1994)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Maebry v. McNeil
534 A.2d 1256 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1988)