Legal Opinion
Scrivani v. Vallombroso
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided February 20, 2007No. AC 26315PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DiPENTIMA, J.
The defendant, Andrew Vallom-broso, 1 appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding attorney’s fees and punitive damages to the plaintiffs, Marlene Scrivani and Dina Garamella, under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes § 42-110a et seq. 2 The defendant raises the following two issues on appeal: (1) did the court improperly conclude that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover under CUTPA on the basis of the defendant’s violations of the Home Improvement Act, General Statutes § 20-418 et seq., that were unrelated to damages; and (2)…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- De La Concha of Hartford, Inc. v. Aetna Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Macomber v. Travelers Property & Casualty Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Ventres v. Goodspeed Airport, LLCSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
- A. Secondino & Son, Inc. v. LoRiccoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Abrahams v. Young & Rubicam, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Naples v. Keystone Building & Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Hees v. Burke Construction Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Kendall v. AmsterConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- Pedrini v. KiltonicConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
- Scrivani v. VallombrosoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.