Legal Opinion
Brandewiede v. Emery Worldwide
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided November 24, 1992No. Civ. 5-90-504 (WWE)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
EGINTON, Senior District Judge.
Defendant Emery Worldwide (“Emery”), a Delaware Corporation, brings this motion for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b) on the grounds that plaintiffs contract claim is governed by New York law and, thus, is barred by the New York Statute of Frauds governing oral fee agreements. Emery also contends that plaintiff fails to state a claim under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (“CUTPA”), Conn.Gen.Stat. § 42-110g(f). For the reasons stated below, summary judgment will be denied.
Facts
In accordance with the standard…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- American International Group, Inc. v. London American International Corporation Limited and Midland Bank LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Mead v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United Technologies Corp. v. American Home Assurance Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1997
- John Doe No. 1 v. Knights of ColumbusDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2013
- Prestige Institute For Plastic Surgery, PC v. Aetna, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2024
- Scales v. Webster BankDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2025