Case ID: conn_72/html/0734-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James E. Clark vs. Joseph T. Whittlesey.
    Third Judicial District.
    Argued June 14th
    decided June 19th, 1900.
    Actioh to recover for services as a broker, brought to the Court of Common Pleas in New Haven County and tried to court, Bishop, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the defendant, and appeal by the plaintiff for alleged errors in the rulings of the court.
    
      No error.
    
    
      'William S. My and James J. Buchanan, for the appellant (plaintiff).
    
      James P. Pigott, for the appellee (defendant).
   Per Curiam.

There is no question of law presented by the record. The finding does not state ultimate facts at all. Evidential facts only are recited; and as the trial court has decided the issue in favor of the defendant this court is concluded thereby.