Legal Opinion · Dissent

First Nat. Bank of Litchfield v. Miller

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided September 12, 2006No. AC 26278Published

1DissentBishop, J.

In this contract matter, the trial court determined that the defendants Bruce Y. Miller and Linda M. Miller accepted the boat in question and that their acceptance had not been revoked by their later refusal to take possession of the boat. Because the question of acceptance is fact bound and because I believe that the court’s determination in this regard was not clearly erroneous, I respectfully dissent.

*401On appeal, the Millers challenge the court’s finding that they accepted the boat. While I agree with the majority’s recitation of the facts leading to the parties’ dispute, I depart from the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wesley v. Schaller Subaru, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
  2. Forastiere v. HigbieConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
  3. Contoura Business Products, Inc. v. TLD, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API