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. ****************************************************** JOHN M. GLOVER AGENCY v. RDB BUILDING, LLC (AC 19813)
Landau, Pellegrino and Peters, Js. Argued September 22--officially released November 7, 2000 Counsel

Carolyn A. Comerford, for the appellant (defendant). James J. Farrell, with whom, on the brief, were Bruce J. Gelson and Patrick M. Birney, for the appellee (plaintiff).
Opinion

LANDAU, J. The defendant, RDB Building, LLC, appeals from the judgment rendered by the trial court in accordance with the report of the attorney fact finder1 in favor of the plaintiff, John M. Glover Agency. The defendant claims that the court improperly (1) affirmed the conclusions of the fact finder, which were unsupported by the pleadings and the evidence,2 (2) construed the plain language of the agreement between the parties and (3) applied the provisions of General Statutes

Download John M. Glover Agency v. RDB Building, LLC.pdf

Connecticut Law