Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 46a-64c

Citation
Section 46a-64c
Parent Document
Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities Ex Rel. Arnold v. Forvil, 25 A.3d 632 (2011)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2011-08-30

Other Sections in This Document (123)

Full Text

867 chars
We begin by setting forth our standard for reviewing a trial court’s assessment of compensatory damages. “The assessment of damages is peculiarly within the province of the trier and the award will be sustained so long as it does not shock the sense of justice. The test is whether the amount of damages awarded falls within the necessarily uncertain limits of fair and just damages. . . . [W]e cannot disturb the decision of the trial court unless there are considerations of the most persuasive character. . . . The trial judge has a broad legal discretion and his action will not be disturbed unless there is a clear abuse. . . . The evidence offered at trial must be reviewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Buckman v. People Express, Inc., 205 Conn. 166, 174-75, 530 A.2d 596 (1987).