Legal Opinion
Vezina v. Nautilus Pools, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 16, 1992No. 10314PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
This is an appeal by the plaintiffs1 from a judgment of the trial court, rendered after a trial to the court, awarding them damages in the amount of $250. The plaintiffs claim that the trial court improperly (1) failed to apply the parol evidence rule, (2) found that the plaintiffs failed to sustain their burden of proving a breach of any warranties and any violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA); General Statutes § 42-110a et seq.; (3) failed to award attorney’s fees, disbursements, or punitive damages, and (4) computed damages. We agree with the plaintiffs’ fourth…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Federal Trade Commission v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- DeLaurentis v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Mead v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Conaway v. PrestiaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Petereit v. S.B. Thomas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Barry v. Posi-Seal International, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- Southington Savings Bank v. RodgersConnecticut Appellate Court · 1995
- Western Dermatology Consultants, P.C. v. VitalWorks, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Gallinari v. KlothDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2015
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.