parties agree rule in Connecticut

2021The parties agree that our standard of review is ple- nary. ‘‘When . . . the trial court draws conclusions of law, our review is plenary and we must decide whether its conclusions are legally and logically correct and find support in the facts that appear in the record.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) National City Mortgage Co. v. Stoecker, 92 Conn. App. 787, 792 , 888 A.2d 95 , cert. denied, 277 Conn. 925 , 895 A.2d 799 (2006).

2021The parties agree that our standard of review is ple- nary. ‘‘When . . . the trial court draws conclusions of law, our review is plenary and we must decide whether its conclusions are legally and logically correct and find support in the facts that appear in the record.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) National City Mortgage Co. v. Stoecker, 92 Conn. App. 787, 792 , 888 A.2d 95 , cert. denied, 277 Conn. 925 , 895 A.2d 799 (2006).

2021The parties agree that our standard of review is ple- nary. ‘‘When . . . the trial court draws conclusions of law, our review is plenary and we must decide whether its conclusions are legally and logically correct and find support in the facts that appear in the record.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) National City Mortgage Co. v. Stoecker, 92 Conn. App. 787, 792 , 888 A.2d 95 , cert. denied, 277 Conn. 925 , 895 A.2d 799 (2006).

2021The parties agree that our standard of review is ple- nary. ‘‘When . . . the trial court draws conclusions of law, our review is plenary and we must decide whether its conclusions are legally and logically correct and find support in the facts that appear in the record.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) National City Mortgage Co. v. Stoecker, 92 Conn. App. 787, 792 , 888 A.2d 95 , cert. denied, 277 Conn. 925 , 895 A.2d 799 (2006).

2017The parties agree that this claim of instructional error is unpreserved and may be subject to the implied waiver announced in State v. Kitchens , 299 Conn. 447 , 482-83, 10 A.3d 942 (2011).

2017The parties agree that this claim of instructional error is unpreserved and may be subject to the implied waiver announced in State v. Kitchens , 299 Conn. 447 , 482-83, 10 A.3d 942 (2011).

2014See generally In re Avirex R., 151 Conn. App. 820 , 833–34, 96 A.3d 662 (2014) (despite court’s use of improper subsection of § 46b-129, impropriety was harmless because court properly found that transfer of guardianship was in child’s best interest and that guardian was suitable and worthy); In re Elvin G., supra, 310 Conn. 506 (court’s failure to provide statuto- rily mandated steps was harmless because, ‘‘even if such steps had been provided, they could not have made a difference in the trial court’s finding of the respondent’s failure to rehabilitate’’). ‘‘Errors of law constitute no groun

2014See generally In re Avirex R., 151 Conn. App. 820 , 833–34, 96 A.3d 662 (2014) (despite court’s use of improper subsection of § 46b-129, impropriety was harmless because court properly found that transfer of guardianship was in child’s best interest and that guardian was suitable and worthy); In re Elvin G., supra, 310 Conn. 506 (court’s failure to provide statuto- rily mandated steps was harmless because, ‘‘even if such steps had been provided, they could not have made a difference in the trial court’s finding of the respondent’s failure to rehabilitate’’). ‘‘Errors of law constitute no groun

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2012The parties agree on the rule of law that “[ujnless the terms of a servitude . . . provide otherwise . . . [tjhe beneficiary of an easement . . . has a duty to the holder of the servient estate to repair and maintain the portions of the servient estate . . . that are under the beneficiary’s control, to the extent necessary to (a) prevent unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the servient estate . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Schwartz v. Murphy, 74 Conn. App. 286 , 297 n.7, 812 A.2d 87 (2002), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 908 , 819 A.2d 841 (2003), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 820

2003In ruling on this motion to strike, "the court is limited to the facts alleged in the complaint." Waters v. Autuori , 236 Conn. 820 , 825 , 676 A.2d 357 (1996).

2003In ruling on this motion to strike, "the court is limited to the facts alleged in the complaint." Waters v. Autuori , 236 Conn. 820 , 825 , 676 A.2d 357 (1996).

1992Defendant cites the case of Lieberman v. Beckwith, 79 Conn. 317 (1906), which says, at pages 319, 320: It is competent for parties to a contract for sale to agree that the thing which is the subject of the contract shall be satisfactory to the vendee, and that the contract shall not be binding on the vendee unless, after examination of the thing or at the time fixed for delivery and payment, the vendee is satisfied with the thing.