Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Maretz v. 595 Corporate Circle

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided September 18, 2001No. SC 16304Published

1Concurrence

VERTEFEUILLE, J., with whom SULLIVAN, J., joins,

concurring. I agree with and join the majority’s conclusion that under General Statutes (Rev. to 1991) § 34-47,1 a general partner of a partnership can bind the partnership to a listing agreement without an additional document that is acknowledged and witnessed pursuant to General Statutes (Rev. to 1991) § 47-5.21 therefore agree with the majority that the Appellate Court improperly affirmed the decision of the trial court to grant the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground that the listing agreement in this case did not satisfy…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Miller v. KirshnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
  2. State v. ColvinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  3. State v. TateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
  4. Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  5. King v. SultarSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API