From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Snell v. Norwalk Yellow Cab, Inc.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 17, 2017
325 Conn. 927 (Conn. 2017)

Opinion

05-17-2017

Brenda SNELL v. NORWALK YELLOW CAB, INC., et al.

Adam J. Blank and Sarah Gleason, in support of the petition. Laura Pascale Zaino and Kevin M. Roche, in opposition.


Adam J. Blank and Sarah Gleason, in support of the petition.

Laura Pascale Zaino and Kevin M. Roche, in opposition.

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 172 Conn.App. 38, 158 A.3d 787 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed on the basis that the doctrine of superseding cause applies in cases in which the conduct of a third party is criminally reckless?

"2. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the plaintiffs motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial?"

ROGERS, C.J., and ROBINSON, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.


Summaries of

Snell v. Norwalk Yellow Cab, Inc.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 17, 2017
325 Conn. 927 (Conn. 2017)
Case details for

Snell v. Norwalk Yellow Cab, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Brenda SNELL v. NORWALK YELLOW CAB, INC., et al.

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: May 17, 2017

Citations

325 Conn. 927 (Conn. 2017)
169 A.3d 232

Citing Cases

The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. v. Red Hawk Fire & Security, Inc.

And of course, for purposes of this motion, there must be sufficient certainty (no material issue of fact) to…

Snell v. Norwalk Yellow Cab, Inc.

The Appellate Court rejected the plaintiff's claims; id., at 41–42, 158 A.3d 787 ; and we granted the…