History
  • No items yet
midpage
Carr v. Mehta
14 Conn. App. 808
Conn. App. Ct.
1988
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

This appeal is an attempt by the defendant to have this court retry the facts found by the trial court. We will not. The defendant also claims that the trial court’s orders are impermissibly vague. We do not agree. Furthermore, any claimed ambiguity could have been clarified for the defendant by the seeking of articulation from the trial court.

There is no error.

Case Details

Case Name: Carr v. Mehta
Court Name: Connecticut Appellate Court
Date Published: Apr 21, 1988
Citation: 14 Conn. App. 808
Docket Number: 6447
Court Abbreviation: Conn. App. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.