From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fratzel v. Fratzel

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Nov 29, 1967
236 A.2d 83 (Conn. 1967)

Opinion

Argued November 7, 1967

Decided November 29, 1967

Action to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendants, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and tried to the court, Parskey, J.; judgment for the plaintiff and appeal by the named defendant. No error.

Joseph M. Brandon, with whom, on the brief, was David E. FitzGerald, Jr., for the appellant (named defendant).

Charles G. Albom, with whom, on the brief, was Matthew G. Galligan, for the appellee (plaintiff).


The plaintiff brought this action against the named defendant and Margaret and Nicholas P. Galotti to recover damages for personal injuries sustained on June 13, 1964, when an automobile driven by the named defendant in which the plaintiff was a passenger was struck from the rear by an automobile owned by Margaret Galotti and driven by Nicholas P. Galotti. The case was tried to the court, which concluded that the collision was caused by the negligence of both operators, and it rendered judgment against all the defendants. The named defendant alone has appealed.

We have examined the record and have concluded that the named defendant is not entitled to, the changes in the finding requested by him and that the court could reasonably have concluded that he was negligent and that his negligence, as well as the negligence of Galotti, was a proximate cause of the collision, which resulted in injuries to the plaintiff.


Summaries of

Fratzel v. Fratzel

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Nov 29, 1967
236 A.2d 83 (Conn. 1967)
Case details for

Fratzel v. Fratzel

Case Details

Full title:NOMA FRATZEL v. RICHARD FRATZEL ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Nov 29, 1967

Citations

236 A.2d 83 (Conn. 1967)
236 A.2d 83

Citing Cases

Radulski v. Anchor Reef Club

A municipal planning commission, whether functioning in a legislative, judicial or quasi-judicial capacity,…

Catropa v. New Milford Planning Commission

Although the standards set forth in Sections 5.02 and 5.03 of the regulations are general in nature they do…