Siudyla v. ChemExec Relocation Systems, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtDaly, J.
The plaintiffs appeal from the trial court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants J. Christine Mangano, James A. Mangano and ChemExec Relocations Systems, Inc. (hereinafter the defendants), as to counts one, two and four of the plaintiffs’ substitute complaint.1 The plaintiffs brought suit against the defendants for damages arising out of a contract to buy the defendants’ property. Shortly after taking up residence, the plaintiffs discovered that the well on the property failed to produce sufficient water for their needs. In response to the plaintiffs’ substituted…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Federal Trade Commission v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Nolan v. BorkowskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- D.H.R. Construction Co. v. DonnellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Conaway v. PrestiaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- McLaughlin Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- American Car Rental, Inc. v. Commissioner of Consumer ProtectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
- Noble v. MarshallConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- Ditchkus Real Estate Co. v. StormConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- O & G Industries, Inc. v. Town of New MilfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Francoline v. KlattConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.