Legal Opinion
Yeong Gil Kim v. Magnotta
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 23, 1998No. AC 16509PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HENNESSY, J.
The plaintiffs, Yeong Gil Kim and Hi-Soon Seo Kim, appeal from the trial court’s denial of their motion for rescission of the underlying stipulated *205judgment. The named defendant, Dominick Magnotta,1 cross appeals from the denial of his motion for a directed verdict and his motion to set aside the jury verdict of a violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes § 42-110a et seq.2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
On December 5, 1989, the plaintiffs purchased a car wash business from Raindance, Inc., a corporation owned and…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Hinchliffe v. American Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Gillis v. GillisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Kenworthy v. KenworthySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Foley v. Huntington Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- A. Secondino & Son, Inc. v. LoRiccoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Kim v. MagnottaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Duplissie v. DevinoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Scinto v. SosinConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Winchester v. McCueConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Strouth v. Pools by Murphy & Sons, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2003
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.