Opinion · Supreme Court of Connecticut

Amore v. Frankel

225 Conn. 904

Type: Opinion
Court: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Date: 1993-02-11
Topic: litigation

The defendant commissioner’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 565 (AC 10677), is granted, limited to the following issues: “1. Does the duty of the commissioner of transportation to maintain highways, bridges and sidewalks under General Statutes § 13a-144 extend to driveways? *905Decided February 11, 1993 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14689. Michael 0 ’Sullivan, in support of the petition. Robert J.

Citator

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

Cited by: 1 opinion

The defendant commissioner’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 565 (AC 10677), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Does the duty of the commissioner of transportation to maintain highways, bridges and sidewalks under General Statutes § 13a-144 extend to driveways?

*905 Decided February 11, 1993 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14689. Michael 0 ’Sullivan, in support of the petition. Robert J. Enright, in opposition.

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the trial court’s dismissal of this action on the basis that the complaint stated a cause of action under General Statutes § 13a-144, notwithstanding the affidavits of the defendant indicating that the defendant had no duty to keep the area in question in repair?”