Case Name: Ben Magid Rabinovitch vs. Pattie Brooks
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1925-02-23
Citations: 102 Conn. 754
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ben Magid Rabinovitch vs. Pattie Brooks.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 102
Pages: 754–754

Head Matter:
Ben Magid Rabinovitch vs. Pattie Brooks.
Third Judicial District, New Haven,
January Term, 1925.
Wheeler, C. J., Beach, Curtis, Keeler and Haines, Js.
Argued January 21st —
decided February 23d, 1925.
Action to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract by the defendant to take and pay for a course of instruction in photography, brought to and tried by the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County, Hall, Acting Judge; facts found and judgment rendered for the defendant, and appeal by the plaintiff.
No error.
Harry Allison Goldstein, for the appellant (plaintiff).
Frank M. Canfield, for the appellee (defendant).

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The so-called claims of law made in the argument in the trial court were claims of fact. The issues of fact were found upon conflicting evidence in favor of the defendant. It is under such circumstances useless to attempt their retrial in this court.
The second reason of appeal was not made in the trial court and for that reason will not be considered. Reason of appeal three, that the court mistook the law in rendering judgment for the plaintiff, is general and cannot under the rules be regarded. Reason of appeal four, based upon corrections of the finding, is not well taken. The appeal is entirely without merit.
There is no error.