Legal Opinion
Musso v. Seiders
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided September 8, 1999No. 3:97CV2606 (RNC), 3:98CV977 (RNC)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RECOMMENDED RULING ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT UPON SETTLEMENT
MARTINEZ, United States Magistrate Judge.
This action alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen.Stat. § 42-110a. Pending before this court is the plaintiffs Motion for Judgment Upon Settlement (doc. # 65). For the reasons that follow, the court recommends that the motion be DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND 1
Counsel for the parties began discussing settlement in November, 1998. 2 Attorney Faulkner, who represents the plaintiff, and Attorney Guerrini, the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Floyd Frank v. Sally B. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Louis Fennell v. Tlb Kent Company and Joseph PietrykaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Keithley Edwards v. Born, Inc. Appeal of Keithley Edwards and Edith EdwardsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- Doudou Janneh v. Gaf Corporation and Ozalid Corporation, Gaf CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Murray v. LedbetterAlaska Supreme Court · 2006
- KLEINE v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008