Corporations

Marilyn Gambardella v. City of New Haven

13 Conn. App. 819·Connecticut Appellate Court·1988·CT

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Marilyn Gambardella v. City of New Haven (5686) Dupont, C. J., Borden and Stoughton, Js. Argued February 10 — decision released February 22, 1988 Charles G. Albom, with whom, on the brief, was Patricia Cofrancesco, corporation counsel, for the appellant (defendant). Arthur R. Riccio, Jr., for the appellee (plaintiff). [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. The defendant’s first claim of error is that the defendant’s stop sign, which was improperly located so as to be obscured from view, could not as a matter of law be a highway defect. This claim was not raised in the trial court in any way, and does not qualify for review under the plain error doctrine. The defendant’s second claim of error, namely, that there was insufficient evidence of constructive notice, is without merit. There is no error.