Case Name: Helen Verrillo et al. v. Arthur F. Green et al.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1967-05-10
Citations: 155 Conn. 694
Docket Number: 
Parties: Helen Verrillo et al. v. Arthur F. Green et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 155
Pages: 694–695

Head Matter:
Helen Verrillo et al. v. Arthur F. Green et al.
King, C. J., Alcobn, House, Them: and Ryan, Js.
Argued May 9
decided May 10, 1967
William W. Sprague, with whom was James T. Haviland II, for the appellants (named defendant et al.).
William B. Davis, with whom, on the brief, were Leon BisCassi and Frank Odium, for the appellees (plaintiffs).

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This appeal claimed error in a portion of the charge to the jury on the issue of damages and in the refusal of the court to set aside the verdict as excessive.
In the light of the entire charge on the issue of damages and the limited exception taken to it, we find nothing erroneous. Lucier v. Meriden-Wallingford Sand & Stone Co., 153 Conn. 422, 426, 216 A.2d 818.
On the evidence presented, the jury could reasonably find that the damages awarded constituted fair, just and reasonable compensation for the injuries the plaintiffs sustained. Accordingly, there was no error in the refusal of the court to set the verdict aside. Schaller v. Roadside Inn, Inc., 154 Conn. 61, 68, 221 A.2d 268; Lopez v. Price, 145 Conn. 560, 564, 569, 145 A.2d 127.
There is no error.