Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Citation
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Parent Document
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1984-01-12
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3321218/kredi-v-benson/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (34)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
- Kredi v. Benson, 473 A.2d 333 (1984)
Full Text
778 charsThe court denied the defendants’ motion for a jury trial. At the beginning of the trial in November, 1982, the plaintiffs’ counsel orally moved to amend the complaint so as to allege that the rent due was $220 by virtue of an oral agreement between the parties to increase the rent. The court reserved decision on whether to allow the amendment after hearing the defendants’ objection. After a trial on the merits, the court granted the motion to amend and rendered judgment for the plaintiffs. The court found that the defendant Bixford Martin, acting on behalf of all three of the defendants, orally agreed to a $41 per month increase in the rent. The court concluded, therefore, that the rent due for August, 1982, was $220 and that the defendants had not paid that amount. I