From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Budney v. Zalot

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Apr 22, 1975
168 Conn. 388 (Conn. 1975)

Opinion

Argued April 3, 1975

Decision released April 22, 1975

Action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant, brought to the Superior Court and transferred to the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County and tried to the jury before Collins, J.; verdict for the plaintiff, who filed a motion to set aside the verdict which was denied; judgment for the plaintiff, from which she appealed to this court. No error.

Waldemar J. Lach, for the appellant (plaintiff).

David T. Ryan, for the appellee (defendant).


The sole question on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in refusing the plaintiff's offer into evidence of a series of bills for medical examination, treatment and drugs in the absence of any medical expert testimony which would support a finding that there was any causal connection between the accident for which the plaintiff's suit was brought and the services and drugs for which the bills were rendered. "To be entitled to damages a plaintiff must establish a causal relation between the injury and the physical condition which he claims resulted from it. Bates v. Carroll, 99 Conn. 677, 679, 122 A. 562. This causal connection must rest upon more than surmise or conjecture. Witkowski v. Goldberg, 115 Conn. 693, 696, 163 A. 413; Green v. Stone, 119 Conn. 300, 306, 176 A. 123. A trier is not concerned with possibilities but with reasonable probabilities. Richardson v. Pratt Whitney Mfg. Co., 129 Conn. 669, 672, 30 A.2d 919. The causal relation between an injury and its later physical effects may be established by the direct opinion of a physician, by his deduction by the process of eliminating causes other than the traumatic agency, or by his opinion based upon a hypothetical question." Boland v. Vanderbilt, 140 Conn. 520, 525, 102 A.2d 362.

In the absence of any medical evidence whatsoever which would support a finding that the bills offered into evidence by the plaintiff were causally connected with the alleged negligence of the defendant, the court properly excluded the offered exhibits.


Summaries of

Budney v. Zalot

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Apr 22, 1975
168 Conn. 388 (Conn. 1975)
Case details for

Budney v. Zalot

Case Details

Full title:JULIA B. BUDNEY v. BRUNO ZALOT

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Apr 22, 1975

Citations

168 Conn. 388 (Conn. 1975)
362 A.2d 861

Citing Cases

Muschette v. Kelly

(Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Budney v. Zalot, 168 Conn. 388, 388-89, 362 A.2d…

Ward v. Frank

To be entitled to damages, the plaintiff must establish a causal connection between her injuries and physical…