Opinion · Supreme Court of Connecticut

Gajewski v. Pavelo

227 Conn. 926

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jurisdiction
Connecticut
Date
1993-10-05
Topic
general

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 32 Conn. App. 373 (AC 11404), is granted, limited to the following issues: “1. Where the jury by the words used in its verdict indicated that it had found the plaintiffs failed to prove their case, was the Appellate Court correct in finding that the jury could have reached its conclusion based on the allegations contained in a special defense? “2. Was the Appellate Court correct in finding that the special defense of contributory negligence justified the application of the general verdict rule when no evidence was presented at the trial in support of the defense? “3. Was the Appellate Court correct in applying the general verdict rule where the plaintiffs claim error in the charge on the defendants’ liability, the verdict is upheld on the basis of contributory negligence, and the jury, in considering contributory negligence, is required by law to compare the plaintiffs’ liability to the defendants’ liability?”

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Gajewski v. Pavelo. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 32 Conn. App. 373 (AC 11404), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Where the jury by the words used in its verdict indicated that it had found the plaintiffs failed to prove their case, was the Appellate Court correct in finding that the jury could have reached its conclusion based on the allegations contained in a special defense?

“2. Was the Appellate Court correct in finding that the special defense of contributory negligence justified the application of the general verdict rule when no evidence was presented at the trial in support of the defense?

“3. Was the Appellate Court correct in applying the general verdict rule where the plaintiffs claim error in the charge on the defendants’ liability, the verdict is upheld on the basis of contributory negligence, and the jury, in considering contributory negligence, is required by law to compare the plaintiffs’ liability to the defendants’ liability?”