Vuono v. Eldred

236 A.2d 470, 155 Conn. 704
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 12, 1967·Published·Cited by 47 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant, Boger A. Eldred, to recover for personal injuries and property damage arising out of a collision between a car owned and operated by the plaintiff and a car operated by Patricia M. Eldred, who is not a party to this action. [705] The complaint alleged that the defendant owned the latter car and that the injuries and damage complained of were caused by the negligent operation of the car by Patricia. There was no allegation that Patricia was the agent of the defendant, and the family car doctrine was not pleaded. In his answer, the defendant denied ownership of the vehicle.

At the conclusion of the evidence, the jury, at the direction of the court, returned a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff thereupon moved to set aside the verdict. The court granted the motion and set aside the verdict. From this decision, the defendant has appealed to us.

“Although a directed verdict is not favored, it is justified if on the evidence the jury could not reasonably and legally reach any other conclusion than that embodied in the verdict as directed.” McDonald v. Connecticut Co., 151 Conn. 14, 17, 193 A.2d 490; White v. E & F Construction Co., 151 Conn. 110, 112, 193 A.2d 716; Johnson v. Consolidated Industries, Inc., 153 Conn. 522, 524, 218 A.2d 380. In reviewing the action of the trial court, in first directing and thereafter setting aside the verdict, we consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Johnson v. Consolidated Industries, Inc., supra.

Since the action of the trial court in setting aside a verdict involves the exercise of a broad legal discretion, it will not be disturbed unless that discretion has been abused. Brooks v. Singer, 147 Conn. 719, 158 A.2d 745; Butler v. Steck, 146 Conn. 114, 117, 148 A.2d 246. An examination of the appendices discloses that no evidence was presented to establish that the defendant was the owner of the automobile. Furthermore, there was no allegation and no evidence that Patricia M. Eldred was the agent [706] of the defendant. Consequently, there was nothing on which a verdict for the plaintiff could be predicated.

There is error, and the case is remanded with direction to render judgment on the verdict.

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

Vuono v. Eldred, 236 A.2d 470, 155 Conn. 704 (Colo. 1967).

236 A.2d 470 (Vuono v. Eldred) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

ROBICHAUD v. HEWLETT PACKARD CO.
847 A.2d 316 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2003)
Yimoyines v. Classic Turf Co., No. X01 Cv 00 01613345 S (Jan. 28, 2003)
2003 Conn. Super. Ct. 1513 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2003)
Tracey v. Hill Associates Ltd, No. X01 Cv 98 0166061 (Jan. 3, 2003)
2003 Conn. Super. Ct. 73 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2003)
Tracey v. Hill Associates Ltd., No. X01 Cv 98 0166061 (Dec. 24, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 16464 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Banks v. New Haven, No. X01 Cv 00 0166009 (Dec. 24, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 16646 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Palmieri v. New Haven, No. X01 Cv 98 0166015 (Dec. 24, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 16520 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Milford Hospital v. Federal Ins., No. X01 Cv 01 0075817 S (Oct. 15, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 13104 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Connecticut Nat'l Bank v. Rytman, No. X01 Cv 87 0159941s (Aug. 20, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 10730 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Gilbert v. Beaver Dam Assoc., No. X01-Cv-00 0169605s (Aug. 19, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 10443 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Gilbert v. Beaver Dam Assoc., No. X01-Cv 00 0169605s (Aug. 15, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 10450 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Simons v. Louis Family Restaurant, No. Cv 00 0082280s (Jul. 25, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 9274 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Simkins Industries v. Marsh USA, No. X01-Cv 01 0166142 S (Jul. 19, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 9327 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Connecticut National Bank v. Rytman, No. X01 Cv 87 0159941 (Jul. 19, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 9034 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Schipul v. Crovo, No. Cv 01-0085367-S (Jul. 18, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 8857 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Smith v. 109 Foster Street, No. Cv00 0072817 (Jun. 5, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 7159 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
McCoy v. Roche, No. X01 Cv 00 0168694s (May 28, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 6902 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Arnone v. Connecticut Light Power, No. X01 Cv 98 0168276 (Mar. 22, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 3858 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Sherman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Amer., No. Cv 99 0078688s (Mar. 6, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 2855 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Arrow Electronics v. Federal Ins. Co., No. X01 Cv 00 0167080 (Jan. 7, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 198 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Esposito v. Shell Oil Company, No. X01-Cv-97 0159182s (Dec. 17, 2001)
2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 16679 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2001)