Legal Opinion
MJM Landscaping, Inc. v. Lorant
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 13, 2004No. SC 17023PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PALMER, J.
The dispositive issue raised by this appeal is whether a written agreement (agreement) entered into by the plaintiff, MJM Landscaping, Inc., and the named defendant, Paul R. Lorant,1 is subject to the requirements of the Home Improvement Act (act), General Statutes § 20-418 et seq. The plaintiff initiated this action seeking strict foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien that was filed in connection with the defendant’s failure to pay in full for a septic system that the plaintiff *431had constructed and installed on the defendant’s property. The defendant acknowledged that he had…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Clifford F. MacEvoy Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Calvin Tomkins Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Rizzo Pool Co. v. Del GrossoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Meadows v. HigginsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Wright Bros. Builders, Inc. v. DowlingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Woronecki v. TrappeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. AllenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- Hees v. Burke Construction Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Lowe v. City of SheltonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- In re Champlain Oil Company Conditional Use ApplicationSupreme Court of Vermont · 2014
- McBurney v. PaquinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.