Maretz v. 595 Corporate Circle

753 A.2d 940, 253 Conn. 906, 2000 Conn. LEXIS 160
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided May 4, 2000·No. SC 16304·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 56 Conn. App. 815 (AC 18716), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that a real estate listing agreement was unenforceable under General Statutes (Rev. to 1991) § 20-325a on the ground that the signatures of the general partners of the partnership ownership of the property were not acknowledged and witnessed?

[907]*907The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16304. Edwin L. Doemberger, in support of the petition. James C. Graham, in opposition. Decided May 4, 2000

“2. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the amendments to General Statutes § 20-325a, enacted by No. 94-240 of the 1994 Public Acts, did not apply to real estate listing agreements signed prior to the effective date?”

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

Maretz v. 595 Corporate Circle, 753 A.2d 940, 253 Conn. 906, 2000 Conn. LEXIS 160 (Colo. 2000).

753 A.2d 940 (Maretz v. 595 Corporate Circle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Maretz v. 595 Corporate Circle
780 A.2d 43 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2001)