Olstza v. Fenton

CourtListener 7904909ConnappctJun 16, 1989

Full text

Per Curiam.
The plaintiffs have appealed from the judgment rendered in favor of the defendants in this medical malpractice action. The sole issue raised is whether the trial court correctly charged the jury on the foreseeability of harm. The charge given by the trial court in this case comports with the charge on foreseeability of harm approved by our Supreme Court in Pisel v. Stamford Hospital, 180 Conn. 314, 331-32, 430 A.2d 1 (1980).

There is no error.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.