Sullivan v. Lazzari, 43 A.3d 750 (2012)

Citation: Sullivan v. Lazzari, 43 A.3d 750 (2012)
Parent Document: Sullivan v. Lazzari, 43 A.3d 750 (2012)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2012-05-29
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2294526/sullivan-v-lazzari/ ↗

Full Text

989 chars

move into the premises and never asked them to sign a lease or to pay rent. She further testified that Fryer owned the premises and that, after being appointed Fryer’s conservator, she asked the defendants to leave the premises. The defendants refused, however, to leave the premises and, at the time of trial, still resided at the premises. The court’s conclusion was not erroneous simply because some of the plaintiffs testimony may have been contradicted by testimony of other witnesses. As the trier of fact, it was the court’s exclusive province “to weigh the conflicting evidence, determine the credibility of witnesses and determine whether to accept some, all or none of a witness’ testimony. . . . Thus, if the court’s dispositive finding . . . was not clearly erroneous, then the judgment must be affirmed. . . . The function of the appellate court is to review, and not retry, the proceedings of the trial court.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) LPP Mortgage, Ltd. v. Lynch,

Other Sections in This Document (77)

Full Text