Verrillo v. Green
Helen Verrillo v. Arthur F. Green
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
This appeal claimed error in a portion of the charge to the jury on the issue of damages and in the refusal of the court to set aside the verdict as excessive.
In the light of the entire charge on the issue of damages and the limited exception taken to it, we find nothing erroneous. Lucier v. Meriden-Wallingford Sand & Stone Co., 153 Conn. 422, 426 , 216 A.2d 818 .
On the evidence presented, the jury could reasonably find that the damages awarded constituted fair, *695 just and reasonable compensation for the injuries the plaintiffs sustained. Accordingly, there was no error in the refusal of the court to set the verdict aside. Schaller v. Roadside Inn, Inc., 154 Conn. 61, 68 , 221 A.2d 268 ; Lopez v. Price, 145 Conn. 560, 564, 569 , 145 A.2d 127 .
There is no error.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.