Legal Opinion
CMG Realty of Connecticut, Inc. v. Colonnade One at Old Greenwich Ltd. Partnership
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided January 31, 1995No. 12300PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpear, J.
The sole issue on the appeal by the named plaintiff1 is whether a clause that required the defendant owners2 to pay the plaintiff broker $50,000 to terminate a brokerage contract was an unenforceable penalty. The issue3 on the defendants’ cross appeal is whether a brokerage contract made “as of” July 1, 1988, satisfies the date requirement of General Statutes § 20-325a (b) (3)4 where the plaintiff broker was not incorporated until August 15,1988, and did not sign the contract until October, 1988. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
*656The plaintiff sought money damages from the defendants…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Kelley v. BonneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Collins v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Russell v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Batter Building Materials Co. v. KirschnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Seal Audio, Inc. v. Bozak, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Jameson Realty Group v. KostinerAppellate Court of Illinois · 2004
- 669 Atlantic Street Associates v. Atlantic-Rockland Stamford AssociatesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Town of South Windsor v. South Windsor Police Union, Local 1480Connecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- BRJM, LLC v. Output Systems, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Biro v. HirschConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.