Florian v. Lenge

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting claim that court deprived defendant of opportunity to object to request for attorney’s fees when defendant failed to file objection in nearly two month period between plaintiff’s filing of affidavit of fees and court’s issuance of decision
• reviewing claim challenging restrictions on cross-examination despite ‘‘sparse’’ brief noncompliant with Practice Book § 67-4 [d] [3] ‘‘[b]ecause the defendant, however, gives some indication as to what he sought to pursue and cites to relevant portions of the transcript’’
• “[i]t is axiomatic that [w]e may affirm a proper result of the trial court for a different reason” [internal quotation marks omitted]
• question of whether promissory note meets definition of negotiable instrument is question of law subject to plenary review
• ‘‘[i]t is axiomatic that [w]e may affirm a proper result of the trial court for a different reason’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)
• ‘‘[i]t is axiomatic that [w]e may affirm a proper result of the trial court for a different reason’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).