Opinion · Supreme Court of Connecticut

Sullivan v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad

Sullivan v. Metro-North Commuter R.R., 280 Conn. 919 (Conn. 2006)

Type: Opinion
Court: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Date: 2006-09-27
Topic: bankruptcy

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 96 Conn. App. 741 (AC 24895), is granted, limited to the following issues: “1. Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court’s ruling precluding the expert testimony of John W. Kennish, an expert in premises security, on the *920ground that he had no experience, training or special knowledge relating to railroad security systems? The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17739.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Sullivan v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 2 opinions

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 96 Conn. App. 741 (AC 24895), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court’s ruling precluding the expert testimony of John W. Kennish, an expert in premises security, on the *920 ground that he had no experience, training or special knowledge relating to railroad security systems?

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17739. Decided September 27, 2006 John H. Van Lenten, in support of the petition. Robert C. E. Laney, Charles A. Deluca and Sarah F. DePanfilis, in opposition.

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court’s jury instruction on superseding and intervening causes?”