Economos v. Liljedahl Bros.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Economos v. Liljedahl Bros.

870 A.2d 1082, 273 Conn. 913, 2005 Conn. LEXIS 100

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided March 11, 2005·No. SC 17394·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 86 Conn. App. 578 (AC 24877), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court improperly vacated the arbitration award because the arbitrator manifestly disregarded the law?”

[914]*914The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17394. Karen L. Dowd, Wesley W. Horton and Anita M. Varanes, in support of the petition. James H. Lee and David R. Clemens, in opposition. Decided March 11, 2005

VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 86 Conn. App. 578 (AC 24877), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court improperly vacated the arbitration award because the arbitrator manifestly disregarded the law?”

[914]*914The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17394. Karen L. Dowd, Wesley W. Horton and Anita M. Varanes, in support of the petition. James H. Lee and David R. Clemens, in opposition. Decided March 11, 2005

VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Economos v. Liljedahl Bros., 870 A.2d 1082, 273 Conn. 913, 2005 Conn. LEXIS 100 (Colo. 2005).

Pincite

870 A.2d 1082 (Economos v. Liljedahl Bros.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related