General
Richard C. Schaeffer v. Cheryl N. Schaeffer
15 Conn. App. 820·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
Richard C. Schaeffer v. Cheryl N. Schaeffer
(6184)
Daly, O’Connell and Stoughton, Js.
Argued June 16—
decision released June 30, 1988
Tony Ghecas, for the appellant (defendant).
Charles F. Stelljes, for the appellee (plaintiff).
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
We have carefully examined the records, transcripts and briefs submitted to us on this appeal. After affording the plaintiff’s claims of error the appropriate scope of review, to the extent that they have been properly presented, we conclude that the trial court correctly applied the law to the evidence. We cannot retry the case. Stiepel v. Cone, 14 Conn. App. 815, 541 A.2d 547 (1988).
There is no error.