Firszt v. Kalinowski

Decision Date02 March 1929
Citation144 A. 894,109 Conn. 732
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesFIRSZT v. KALINOWSKI.

Appeal from Court of Common Pleas, Hartford County; Thomas J. Molloy, Judge.

Action by Joseph S. Firszt against Joseph Kalinowski, conservator, to recover either commissions on a contract or reasonable value of services rendered. Verdict for plaintiff. From order denying a motion to set aside the verdict, the defendant appeals. No error.

James J. O'Connor, of Hartford, for appellant.

Julius Apter and Milton Nahum, both of Hartford, for appellee.

Argued before WHEELER, C.J., and MALTBIE, HAINES, HINMAN, and BANKS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is brought under General Statutes, § 5840, from the denial of the motion to set aside the verdict. The failure of the appellant to make the evidence a part of the record prevents our passing upon the claimed error of the court in denying the appellant's motion to set aside the verdict. Kirkbride v. Bartz, 82 Conn. 615, 74 A. 888.

The other grounds of appeal, alleged errors in the charge, in the ruling on evidence, and for mispleading, cannot be considered under this appeal, by which the single question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is before us. Errors such as these could only be considered upon a finding, and when made a part of an additional appeal. White v. Howd, 66 Conn. 264, 33 A. 915; McCaffrey v. Groton & Stonington St. R. Co., 85 Conn. 584, 594, 84 A. 284.

There is no error.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • State v. Boucher
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 5 d2 Fevereiro d2 1935
    ... ... question of the legal sufficiency of the pleadings. White ... v. Howd, 66 Conn. 264, 267, 33 A. 915; First v ... Kalinowski, 109 Conn. 732, 144 A. 894; Wells v ... Radville, 112 Conn. 459, 466, 467, 153 A. 154. Moreover, ... it does not appear that the question was ... ...
  • State v. Weinrib
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 4 d2 Agosto d2 1953
    ...require no consideration. See Maltbie, Conn.App.Proc., §§ 116, 117; Kirkbride v. Bartz, 82 Conn. 615, 619, 74 A. 888; Firszt v. Kalinowski, 109 Conn. 732, 144 A. 894; Hoyt v. Stuart, 90 Conn. 41, 44, 96 A. 166. The same holds true as to claimed errors in the finding. The questions determina......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT