Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** GETTY PETROLEUM MARKETING, INC. v. WAGAR AHMAD (SC 16168) GETTY PETROLEUM MARKETING, INC. v. E. Z. SAVE, INC., ET AL. (SC 16169)
McDonald, C. J., and Norcott, Palmer, Sullivan and Vertefeuille, Js. Argued February 18--officially released July 25, 2000 Counsel

Charles T. Lee, with whom, on the brief, were Harold N. Eddy, Jr., and Matthew S. Antonetti, for the appellant (plaintiff). Donald P. Reney, Jr., for the appellees (defendants).
Opinion

MCDONALD, C. J. In the present cases, the plaintiff, Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc., appeals from the judgments of the trial court dismissing its summary process actions against the defendants, Wagar Ahmad, E.Z. Save, Inc., and Shop-Ways, Inc., after that court found that the plaintiff had failed to provide notice to the defendants as required by General Statutes

Download Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc. v. Ahmad.pdf

Connecticut Law