Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Fitzpatrick v. Scalzi, 72 Conn. App. 779 (2002)

Citation
Fitzpatrick v. Scalzi, 72 Conn. App. 779 (2002)
Parent Document
Fitzpatrick v. Scalzi, 72 Conn. App. 779 (2002)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2002-10-08

Full Text

931 chars
We first set forth the standard of review for matters involving referees. “It is axiomatic that [a] reviewing authority may not substitute its findings for those of *782the trier of the facts. . . . The factual findings of a [trial referee] on any issue are reversible only if they are clearly erroneous. ... [A reviewing court] cannot retry the facts or pass upon the credibility of the witnesses. ... A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when there is no evidence in the record to support it . . . or when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted). Meadows v. Higgins, 249 Conn. 155, 162, 733 A.2d 172 (1999). Thus, the findings of the referee will be disturbed only if they are clearly erroneous. I THE DEFENDANTS’ LIABILITY UNDER § 47a-21 (d) (2)