Legal Opinion
Grigerik v. Sharpe
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 22, 1998No. SC 15779PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BORDEN, J.
The dispositive issues in this certified appeal are: (1) whether the seven year limitation period of General Statutes § 52-584a,1 or the two year limitation *295period of General Statutes § 52-584,2 2 applies to this action; and (2) whether it is the intent of the promisee of a contractual obligation, rather than the intent of both of the parties to the contract, which determines whether a third party is a beneficiary of the contract in question. The plaintiff, Joseph Grigerik, appeals, and the defendants,3 Gary Sharpe and Angus McDonald-*296Gary Sharpe and Associates, Inc., cross…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Willow Springs Condominium Ass'n v. Seventh BRT Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Gateway Co. v. DiNoiaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Stowe v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- United Illuminating Co. v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Lar-Rob Bus Corp. v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Gazo v. City of StamfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Sharon Gill, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Estate of Gale Gill v. Evansville Sheet Metal Works, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 2012
- Kim v. MagnottaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan AssociatesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Dow & Condon, Inc. v. Brookfield Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.