Legal Opinion
Wallenta v. Moscowitz
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided January 27, 2004No. AC 23049PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DRANGINIS, J.
This appeal concerns rescission and restitution of a contract for the sale of real property. The defendant, Michael L. Moscowitz, an attorney licensed to practice law in the state of Connecticut, agreed to sell certain premises to the plaintiff, Gary K. Wallenta. At trial, the parties agreed to bifurcate the issues of liability, which was tried to the jury, and the remedy, which was tried to the court. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and the court ordered the contract rescinded and that the defendant pay restitution to the plaintiff. The defendant…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- United Housing Foundation, Inc. v. FormanSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Randall v. LoftsgaardenSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Schoonmaker v. Lawrence Brunoli, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Alaimo v. RoyerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Miller v. ApplebySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Connecticut Light and Power Co. v. GilmoreSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Kramer v. PetisiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- In Re the Care & Treatment of FosterSupreme Court of Kansas · 2006
- IM PARTNERS v. Debit Direct Ltd.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
- Labow v. LabowConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.