Legal Opinion
Kronberg Bros. v. Steele
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided September 3, 2002No. AC 21475PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DRANGINIS, J.
The plaintiff, Kronberg Brothers, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendants, John Steele and Eileen Steele. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) concluded that the contract in this case violated the Home Improvement Act (act), General Statutes § 20-418 et seq., (2) awarded damages under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes § 42-110a et seq., and (3) rejected its claim that the defendants had acted in bad faith. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
*55The following facts…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Habetz v. CondonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Wadia Enterprises, Inc. v. HirschfeldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Barrett Builders v. MillerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Meadows v. HigginsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Wright Bros. Builders, Inc. v. DowlingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Naples v. Keystone Building & Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- New England Custom Concrete, LLC v. CarboneConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Tang v. Bou-FakhreddineConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- MacMillan v. HigginsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- Scrivani v. VallombrosoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.