D'Addario v. American Automobile Ins. Co‪.‬

The plaintiff brought this action to recover
from the defendant the amount of a judgment rendered
against its insured, Peter D'Addario. General
Statutes 6191. The case was tried to a jury.
Judgment was rendered upon a verdict for the
defendant, and the plaintiff has appealed. The plaintiff assigned errors in the charge in
that the court (1) failed "to instruct the Jury as
to what constitutes or what are the elements of an
`Express' or `Implied' Contract and the
application of such a Contract to the evidence,"
(2) charged the jury as to an express contract for
transportation when "there was no evidence of such
a contract," and (3) charged the jury "that the
Plaintiff was an employee of the assured and
performing his employer's business by riding in
the assured's truck with his knowledge and
acquiescence." The plaintiff also assigned error
in the finding. That assignment cannot be
considered because the plaintiff's brief has no
appendix containing the pertinent evidence as is
required under the rules. Practice Book 447; Marciniak
v. Wauregan Mills, Inc., 139 Conn. 264, 269,
93 A.2d 135; State v. Reddick, 139 Conn. 398, 401,
94 A.2d 613 LaVoie v. Marshall, 141 Conn. 681, 685, 109 A.2d 508.