Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Zenon v. Mossy, 970 A.2d 814 (2009)

Citation
Zenon v. Mossy, 970 A.2d 814 (2009)
Parent Document
Zenon v. Mossy, 970 A.2d 814 (2009)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2009-06-02

Full Text

704 chars
The plaintiff argues that despite the court’s later reversal of its original ruling, “the effect of the evidence presented could not be removed from the court and the thought process of the fact finder.” Although the plaintiff makes this argument, he has presented no evidence that the court considered these documents in rendering its decision. The court cured any alleged impropriety by reversing its ruling and expressly stating that it would not rely on exhibits E and F. Absent an indication in the record to the contrary, we presume that the court acted properly in the performance of its duties. Wyszomierski v. Siracusa, 290 Conn. 225, 237 n.12, 963 A.2d 943 (2009), citing St. Germain v. LaBrie,