Legal Opinion
Jacobs v. Healey Ford-Subaru, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 10, 1995No. 14990PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKatz, J.
The issue before the court is whether the defendant, who has violated General Statutes § 42-981 *709of the Retail Instalment Sales Financing Act (RISFA) *710and General Statutes § 42a-9-5042 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), must pay damages under each statute to the injured plaintiff. We conclude that, *711because the remedies are not explicitly exclusive, there is no conflict between the two provisions. Accordingly, both must be given concurrent effect and cumulative remedies must be awarded.
*712The plaintiff, Dawn Jacobs, instituted this action against the defendant, Healey Ford-Subaru, Inc., for…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Federal Trade Commission v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Cheshire Mortgage Service, Inc. v. MontesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Conaway v. PrestiaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- McLaughlin Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Normand Josef Enterprises, Inc. v. Connecticut National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Larsen Chelsey Realty Co. v. LarsenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Connecticut National Bank v. GiacomiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Rizzo Pool Co. v. Del GrossoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Saturn Construction Co. v. Premier Roofing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Friezo v. FriezoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.