Girolametti v. VP Buildings, Inc.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Girolametti v. VP Buildings, Inc.

175 A.3d 45, 327 Conn. 983

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedDecember 14, 2017

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 175 A.3d 45 (Girolametti v. VP Buildings, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Girolametti v. VP Buildings, Inc., 175 A.3d 45, 327 Conn. 983 (Colo. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

The petition by the plaintiffs John Girolametti, Cindy Girolametti, Forty-Three South Street, LLC, and Party Depot, Inc., for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 173 Conn. App. 630, 164 A.3d 731 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the trial court's denial of summary judgment based on the doctrine of res judicata when it determined privity existed between the defendant subcontractors and the general contractor after the general contractor had arbitrated issues relating to the construction project with the project owner?"

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

This order supersedes the previously issued order on the petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 173 Conn. App. 630, 164 A.3d 731 (2017), published in the Connecticut Law Journal of December 5, 2017.

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

The petition by the plaintiffs John Girolametti, Cindy Girolametti, Forty-Three South Street, LLC, and Party Depot, Inc., for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 173 Conn. App. 630, 164 A.3d 731 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the trial court's denial of summary judgment based on the doctrine of res judicata when it determined privity existed between the defendant subcontractors and the general contractor after the general contractor had arbitrated issues relating to the construction project with the project owner?"

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

This order supersedes the previously issued order on the petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 173 Conn. App. 630, 164 A.3d 731 (2017), published in the Connecticut Law Journal of December 5, 2017.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 A.3d 45, 327 Conn. 983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/girolametti-v-vp-buildings-inc-conn-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack