Legal Opinion

Hallmark of Farmington v. Roy

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided November 8, 1983No. (2059)PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTesto, J.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover the balance of money due pursuant to a construction contract. The defendant denied that there was any money still due and owing to the plaintiff and pled by way of special defense that the work was not completed in accordance with the contract and that the work performed was improper. The defendant counterclaimed alleging that he had made certain payments to the plaintiff, that the work performed did not conform to the contract and that the swimming pool, the subject of the contract, could not be used in its present condition. The trial…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  2. Gallo v. GalloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
  3. Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  4. Appliances, Inc. v. YostSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  5. Edens v. Kole Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1982

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Todd v. MalafronteConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
  2. New England Whalers Hockey Club v. NairConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
  3. Ernst Steel Corp. v. Reliance InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
  4. Essex Savings Bank v. LeekerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
  5. Holmes v. HolmesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API