General

Frances L. Holmes v. City of New London

140 Conn. 477·Connecticut Supreme Court·1953·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

Frances L. Holmes v. City of New London Baldwin, Inglis, O’Sullivan, Quinlan and Wynne, Js. Argued October 13 decided December 8, 1953 Edmund J. Eshenf elder, for the appellant (defendant). Francis F. McGuire, with whom, on the brief, was Morgan K. McGuire, for the appellee (plaintiff). [MAJORITY — Pee Curiam.] Pee Curiam. All of the claims raised on this appeal have basis only if the finding can be corrected. The conclusions of the trial court are legally drawn from the facts as it found them. To interfere with the conclusions would be to substitute different findings of fact. This cannot he done where there is evidence upon which reasoning minds might disagree. Here there is no basis for correcting the finding. This being so, the conclusions must stand. There is no error.