Harvey v. Daddona
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtHeiman, J.
The defendant appeals from the trial court’s judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor rendered in this action in which the plaintiffs sought money damages, declaratory relief and a mandatory injunction. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly (1) found that the defendant’s obligation for his sons’ “reasonable college expenses” required him to pay full tuition and all related expenses at schools of his sons’ choosing, regardless of the costs, and (2) issued a mandatory injunction as a remedy in a breach of contract claim for money damages.1 We affirm the judgment of the trial…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Sturman v. SochaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Barnard v. BarnardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Walton v. Town of New HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Dukes v. DuranteSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Stocker v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Cheryl Terry Enterprises, Ltd. v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Solomon v. Hall-Brooke Foundation, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- K & R Realty Associates v. GagnonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- Solomon v. Hall-Brooke Foundation, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Colby v. BurnhamConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.