Case ID: conn_165/html/0442-01.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

William Bates III et al. v. Hugh Whittle
    House, O. J., Shapiro, Loiselle, MacDonald and Bogdanski, Js.
    Argued November 7
    decided November 14, 1973
    
      Francis Carling, for the appellant (defendant).
    
      John T. Cummiskey, Jr., for the appellees (named plaintiff et al.).
   Per Curiam.

The question on this appeal involves issues of fact, and the judgment was a result reasonably reached on a permissible view of the evidence. Anderson v. D’Addario, 158 Conn. 616, 262 A.2d 187.

There is no error.