request will not constitute error in Connecticut

2004It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 211 .

1998It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

2010It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Citations omitted.) Id.

2002Although any relevant and accurate request to charge must be given, “a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977).

2018A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance." State v. Casey , 201 Conn. 174 , 178, 513 A.2d 1183 (1986).

2018A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance." State v. Casey , 201 Conn. 174 , 178, 513 A.2d 1183 (1986).

2001State v. Gabriel, 192 Conn. 405, 418 , 473 A.2d 300 (1984); State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

1997It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Citations omitted.) Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977), quoted in State v. Gabriel, 192 Conn. 405, 418 , 473 A.2d 300 (1984).

2001State v. Gabriel, 192 Conn. 405, 418 , 473 A.2d 300 (1984); State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

1997It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Citations omitted.) Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977), quoted in State v. Gabriel, 192 Conn. 405, 418 , 473 A.2d 300 (1984).

2008During cross-examination of the plaintiff, the following testimony was elicited: “[The Defendant’s Counsel]: And when you feel like your business is in a position that you can take the time off, then you will pursue the surgery as Dr. Caputo talked about? “[The Plaintiff]: I believe so, yeah.” The defendant’s objection claimed that “the jury [was] free to find that [the plaintiff] could at some point undergo additional surgery, which would have the probable consequence of reducing his impairment rating and thus reducing the associated pain and suffering, but that he could be compensated fully

2008During cross-examination of the plaintiff, the following testimony was elicited: “[The Defendant’s Counsel]: And when you feel like your business is in a position that you can take the time off, then you will pursue the surgery as Dr. Caputo talked about? “[The Plaintiff]: I believe so, yeah.” The defendant’s objection claimed that “the jury [was] free to find that [the plaintiff] could at some point undergo additional surgery, which would have the probable consequence of reducing his impairment rating and thus reducing the associated pain and suffering, but that he could be compensated fully

2008During cross-examination of the plaintiff, the following testimony was elicited: “[The Defendant’s Counsel]: And when you feel like your business is in a position that you can take the time off, then you will pursue the surgery as Dr. Caputo talked about? “[The Plaintiff]: I believe so, yeah.” The defendant’s objection claimed that “the jury [was] free to find that [the plaintiff] could at some point undergo additional surgery, which would have the probable consequence of reducing his impairment rating and thus reducing the associated pain and suffering, but that he could be compensated fully

2004Moreover, “[a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Gant, 231 Conn. 43, 47 , 646 A.2d 835 (1994), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1038 , 115 S. Ct. 1404 , 131 L.

2008During cross-examination of the plaintiff, the following testimony was elicited: “[The Defendant’s Counsel]: And when you feel like your business is in a position that you can take the time off, then you will pursue the surgery as Dr. Caputo talked about? “[The Plaintiff]: I believe so, yeah.” The defendant’s objection claimed that “the jury [was] free to find that [the plaintiff] could at some point undergo additional surgery, which would have the probable consequence of reducing his impairment rating and thus reducing the associated pain and suffering, but that he could be compensated fully

2004Moreover, “[a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Gant, 231 Conn. 43, 47 , 646 A.2d 835 (1994), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1038 , 115 S. Ct. 1404 , 131 L.

2007Moreover, [a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance. . . .” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Rossi v. Stanback, 36 Conn. App. 328, 332 , 650 A.2d 920 (1994).

2007Moreover, [a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance. . . .” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Rossi v. Stanback, 36 Conn. App. 328, 332 , 650 A.2d 920 (1994).

1992A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested instruction is given in substance.’ ” State v. Jennings, 216 Conn. 647, 663 , 583 A.2d 915 (1990).

1992A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested instruction is given in substance.’ ” State v. Jennings, 216 Conn. 647, 663 , 583 A.2d 915 (1990).

1984It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.’ Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977); see also State v. Maresca, 173 Conn. 450, 460 , 377 A.2d 1330 (1977); State v. Bennett, 172 Conn. 324, 330 , 374 A.2d 247 (1977); State v. Avila, 166 Conn. 569, 574 , 353 A.2d 776 (1974).” State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

1984It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.’ Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977); see also State v. Maresca, 173 Conn. 450, 460 , 377 A.2d 1330 (1977); State v. Bennett, 172 Conn. 324, 330 , 374 A.2d 247 (1977); State v. Avila, 166 Conn. 569, 574 , 353 A.2d 776 (1974).” State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

1984It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.’ Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977); see also State v. Maresca, 173 Conn. 450, 460 , 377 A.2d 1330 (1977); State v. Bennett, 172 Conn. 324, 330 , 374 A.2d 247 (1977); State v. Avila, 166 Conn. 569, 574 , 353 A.2d 776 (1974).” State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

1984It is, however, also the law of this state that a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.’ Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co., 172 Conn. 355, 357 , 374 A.2d 1047 (1977); see also State v. Maresca, 173 Conn. 450, 460 , 377 A.2d 1330 (1977); State v. Bennett, 172 Conn. 324, 330 , 374 A.2d 247 (1977); State v. Avila, 166 Conn. 569, 574 , 353 A.2d 776 (1974).” State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).

2009Merritt, Inc., 105 Conn. App. 7, 11-12 , 936 A.2d 679 (2007).

2009Merritt, Inc., 105 Conn. App. 7, 11-12 , 936 A.2d 679 (2007).

2008During cross-examination of the plaintiff, the following testimony was elicited: “[The Defendant’s Counsel]: And when you feel like your business is in a position that you can take the time off, then you will pursue the surgery as Dr. Caputo talked about? “[The Plaintiff]: I believe so, yeah.” The defendant’s objection claimed that “the jury [was] free to find that [the plaintiff] could at some point undergo additional surgery, which would have the probable consequence of reducing his impairment rating and thus reducing the associated pain and suffering, but that he could be compensated fully

1999“A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Gant, 231 Conn. 43, 47 , 646 A.2d 835 (1994), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1038 , 115 S. Ct. 1404 , 131 L.

2002“A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Bovat v. Waterbury, 258 Conn. 574, 592 , 783 A.2d 1001 (2001) “Moreover, jury instructions are to be read as a whole, and instructions claimed to be improper are read in the context of the entire charge. ...

2002“A refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Bovat v. Waterbury, 258 Conn. 574, 592 , 783 A.2d 1001 (2001) “Moreover, jury instructions are to be read as a whole, and instructions claimed to be improper are read in the context of the entire charge. ...

1994It is well established precedent that although “ ‘[a] request to charge which is relevant to the issues of the case and which is an accurate statement of the law must be given’ ”; State v. Arena, 33 Conn. App. 468, 488 , 636 A.2d 398 (1994), quoting State v. Dickerson, 28 Conn. App. 290, 294 , 612 A.2d 769 (1992); “ ‘[a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.’ ” State v. Arena, supra, 488 . 4 “It is the trial court’s responsibility to instruct the jury in a manner calculated to give them a clear understanding o

1994It is well established precedent that although “ ‘[a] request to charge which is relevant to the issues of the case and which is an accurate statement of the law must be given’ ”; State v. Arena, 33 Conn. App. 468, 488 , 636 A.2d 398 (1994), quoting State v. Dickerson, 28 Conn. App. 290, 294 , 612 A.2d 769 (1992); “ ‘[a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.’ ” State v. Arena, supra, 488 . 4 “It is the trial court’s responsibility to instruct the jury in a manner calculated to give them a clear understanding o

1992State v. Gabriel, [supra]; State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).’ State v. Casey, 201 Conn. 174, 178 , 513 A.2d 1183 (1986). [Our Supreme Court] has often repeated that '[a] charge to the jury is not to be critically dissected for the purpose of discovering possible inaccuracies of statement, but it is to be considered rather as to its probable effect upon the jury in guiding them to a correct verdict in the case.’ State v. Estep, 186 Conn. 648, 651 , 443 A.2d 483 (1982); State v. Harris, 172 Conn. 223, 226 , 374 A.2d 203 (1977); Amato v. Desenti, 117 Conn. 612, 617 , 169

1992State v. Gabriel, [supra]; State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).’ State v. Casey, 201 Conn. 174, 178 , 513 A.2d 1183 (1986). [Our Supreme Court] has often repeated that '[a] charge to the jury is not to be critically dissected for the purpose of discovering possible inaccuracies of statement, but it is to be considered rather as to its probable effect upon the jury in guiding them to a correct verdict in the case.’ State v. Estep, 186 Conn. 648, 651 , 443 A.2d 483 (1982); State v. Harris, 172 Conn. 223, 226 , 374 A.2d 203 (1977); Amato v. Desenti, 117 Conn. 612, 617 , 169

1992Moreover, “[a] charge to the jury is not to be clinically dissected nor are portions of the charge to be read in isolation from the entire instruction.” State v. Toczko, 23 Conn. App. 502, 507 , 582 A.2d 769 (1990).

1992Moreover, “[a] charge to the jury is not to be clinically dissected nor are portions of the charge to be read in isolation from the entire instruction.” State v. Toczko, 23 Conn. App. 502, 507 , 582 A.2d 769 (1990).

1992State v. Gabriel, [supra]; State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).’ State v. Casey, 201 Conn. 174, 178 , 513 A.2d 1183 (1986). [Our Supreme Court] has often repeated that '[a] charge to the jury is not to be critically dissected for the purpose of discovering possible inaccuracies of statement, but it is to be considered rather as to its probable effect upon the jury in guiding them to a correct verdict in the case.’ State v. Estep, 186 Conn. 648, 651 , 443 A.2d 483 (1982); State v. Harris, 172 Conn. 223, 226 , 374 A.2d 203 (1977); Amato v. Desenti, 117 Conn. 612, 617 , 169

1992State v. Gabriel, [supra]; State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).’ State v. Casey, 201 Conn. 174, 178 , 513 A.2d 1183 (1986). [Our Supreme Court] has often repeated that '[a] charge to the jury is not to be critically dissected for the purpose of discovering possible inaccuracies of statement, but it is to be considered rather as to its probable effect upon the jury in guiding them to a correct verdict in the case.’ State v. Estep, 186 Conn. 648, 651 , 443 A.2d 483 (1982); State v. Harris, 172 Conn. 223, 226 , 374 A.2d 203 (1977); Amato v. Desenti, 117 Conn. 612, 617 , 169

1992State v. Gabriel, [supra]; State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).’ State v. Casey, 201 Conn. 174, 178 , 513 A.2d 1183 (1986). [Our Supreme Court] has often repeated that '[a] charge to the jury is not to be critically dissected for the purpose of discovering possible inaccuracies of statement, but it is to be considered rather as to its probable effect upon the jury in guiding them to a correct verdict in the case.’ State v. Estep, 186 Conn. 648, 651 , 443 A.2d 483 (1982); State v. Harris, 172 Conn. 223, 226 , 374 A.2d 203 (1977); Amato v. Desenti, 117 Conn. 612, 617 , 169

1992State v. Gabriel, [supra]; State v. Cooper, 182 Conn. 207, 211 , 438 A.2d 418 (1980).’ State v. Casey, 201 Conn. 174, 178 , 513 A.2d 1183 (1986). [Our Supreme Court] has often repeated that '[a] charge to the jury is not to be critically dissected for the purpose of discovering possible inaccuracies of statement, but it is to be considered rather as to its probable effect upon the jury in guiding them to a correct verdict in the case.’ State v. Estep, 186 Conn. 648, 651 , 443 A.2d 483 (1982); State v. Harris, 172 Conn. 223, 226 , 374 A.2d 203 (1977); Amato v. Desenti, 117 Conn. 612, 617 , 169

2018This court has stated that "a defendant is entitled to a requested instruction on the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance only if there is sufficient evidence for a rational juror to find that all the elements of the defense are established by a preponderance of the evidence." State v. Person , 236 Conn. 342 , 353, 673 A.2d 463 (1996).

2018This court has stated that "a defendant is entitled to a requested instruction on the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance only if there is sufficient evidence for a rational juror to find that all the elements of the defense are established by a preponderance of the evidence." State v. Person , 236 Conn. 342 , 353, 673 A.2d 463 (1996).

2010Co. of America, 119 Conn. App. 85, 90 , 986 A.2d 334 (2010).

2010Co. of America, 119 Conn. App. 85, 90 , 986 A.2d 334 (2010).

2010Moreover, [a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Peatie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 112 Conn. App. 8, 23-24 , 961 A.2d 1016 (2009).

2010Moreover, [a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Peatie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 112 Conn. App. 8, 23-24 , 961 A.2d 1016 (2009).

2005Furthermore, “a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Morgan, 86 Conn. *585 App. 196, 213, 860 A.2d 1239 (2004), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 902 , 868 A.2d 746 (2005). “[W]hether certain factors relating to witness credibility need to be stressed will largely be left to the trial court’s discretion and will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Thomas, supra, 50 Conn. App. 380 .

2005Furthermore, “a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Morgan, 86 Conn. *585 App. 196, 213, 860 A.2d 1239 (2004), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 902 , 868 A.2d 746 (2005). “[W]hether certain factors relating to witness credibility need to be stressed will largely be left to the trial court’s discretion and will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Thomas, supra, 50 Conn. App. 380 .

2005Furthermore, “a refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Morgan, 86 Conn. *585 App. 196, 213, 860 A.2d 1239 (2004), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 902 , 868 A.2d 746 (2005). “[W]hether certain factors relating to witness credibility need to be stressed will largely be left to the trial court’s discretion and will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Thomas, supra, 50 Conn. App. 380 .

2004Moreover, “[a] refusal to charge in the exact words of a request will not constitute error if the requested charge is given in substance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Gant, 231 Conn. 43, 47 , 646 A.2d 835 (1994), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1038 , 115 S. Ct. 1404 , 131 L.