Legal Opinion
Morris v. Cee Dee, LLC
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided July 26, 2005No. AC 25279PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DRANGINIS, J.
In this appeal from the judgment of the trial court granting the application for a prejudgment remedy, 1 the defendant Dee C. Cheshire (individual defendant), 2 claims that the court improperly (1) pierced the corporate veil of the defendant Cee Dee, LLC (company), to award a prejudgment attachment against him individually, and (2) refused to consider his arguments regarding comparative negligence and failure to mitigate damages, contrary to General Statutes § 52-278d. We conclude that the court improperly pierced the corporate veil of the company and, therefore, affirm in…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Angelo Tomasso, Inc. v. Armor Construction & Paving, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Kilduff v. Adams, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Scribner v. O'Brien, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Litchfield Asset Management Corp. v. HowellConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Wellington Systems, Inc. v. Redding Group, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1998
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Landry v. SpitzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Town of New Hartford v. Connecticut Resources Recovery AuthoritySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- KINSALE, LLC v. TombariConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Bernhard-Thomas Building Systems, LLC v. DunicanConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Gateway, Kelso & Co. v. West Hartford No. 1, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.