Esposito v. Presnick, 551 A.2d 755 (Conn. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Esposito v. Presnick, 551 A.2d 755 (Conn. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
47 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Edwards v. Novartis Consumer Hth., No. (X06) Cv-01-0167425 S (Feb. 14, 2003) (connsuperct, 2003-02-14)
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Edwards v. Novartis Consumer Hth., No. (X06) Cv-01-0167425 S (Feb. 14, 2003)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Day v. General Electric Credit Corp. , 15 Conn. App. 677 , 684 , 546 A.2d 315 , cert. denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 755 (1988).
discussed Cited "see" Suh v. Yale University, No. Cv-95-0377911 S (Feb. 9, 2000)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
CT Page 1784 "Bifurcation of trial proceedings lies solely within the discretion of the trial court; see Day v. General Electric Credit Corp. , 15 Conn. App. 677 , 689 , 546 A.2d 315 , cert. denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 755 (1988); In re Jose C. , 11 Conn. App. 507 , 508 , 527 A.2d 1239 (1987); and appellate review is limited to a determination of whether that discretion has been abused.
discussed Cited "see" O'Shea v. Mignone
Conn. App. Ct. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
Accordingly, the trial court instructed the jury, without objection, that it had “decided to separate the issue of liability in this case from the issue of damages.” “Bifurcation of trial proceedings lies solely within the discretion of the trial court; see Day v. General Electric Credit Corp., 15 Conn. App. 677, 689 , 546 A.2d 315 , cert. denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 755 (1988); In re Jose C., 11 Conn. App. 507, 508 , 527 A.2d 1239 (1987); and appellate review is limited to a determination of whether that discretion has been abused.
discussed Cited "see" Reichhold Chemicals, Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
Conn. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
Bifurcation of trial proceedings lies solely within the discretion of the trial court; see Day v. General Electric Credit Corp., 15 Conn. App. 677, 689 , 546 A.2d 315 , cert. denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 755 (1988); In re Jose C., 11 Conn. App. 507, 508 , 527 A.2d 1239 (1987); and appellate review is limited to a determination of whether that discretion has been abused.
cited Cited "see" State v. Salz
Conn. App. Ct. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Reddick, 15 Conn. App. 342, 343 , 545 A.2d 1109 , cert denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 758 (1988).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Healey v. Haymond Law Firm, P.C.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2017 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., State v. Reddick , 15 Conn.App. 342 , 343, 545 A.2d 1109 ("we refuse to review any claim or any alternative claim to a properly briefed claim which has been presented and argued by way of footnotes"), cert. denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 758 (1988).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Harp v. King
Conn. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
Co., 71 S.W.3d 691, 703 (Tenn. 2002); see also Day v. General Electric Credit Corp., 15 Conn. App. 677, 684 , 546 A.2d 315 , cert. denied, 209 Conn. 819 , 551 A.2d 755 (1988) (applying intracorporate conspiracy doctrine).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ralph H. Esposito, Sr.
v.
Daniel Presnick
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 26, 1988.
551 A.2d 755
Daniel V. Presnick, pro se, in support of the petition.
Published

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 15 Conn. App. 654, is denied.