Wooster Associates v. Lates, No. 099552 (Jan. 7, 1991)

Connecticut Superior Court

Wooster Associates v. Lates, No. 099552 (Jan. 7, 1991)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 52

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedJanuary 7, 1991

DocketNo. 099552

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 52 (Wooster Associates v. Lates, No. 099552 (Jan. 7, 1991)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wooster Associates v. Lates, No. 099552 (Jan. 7, 1991), 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 52 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ORDER The respondent has failed to establish probable cause to support a finding that the construction services he provided were provided "by virtue of an agreement with or the consent of the [applicant] or by the consent of some person having authority from or rightfully acting for [the applicant]. . ." Newtown Associates v. Northeast Structures, Inc., 15 Conn. App. 633, 637 (1988). More specifically, there is no evidence of an agreement or of the kind of consent required by law. Avery v. Smith, 96 Conn. 223,228 (1921); Newtown Associates v. Northeast Structures, Inc., supra 640.

The application is granted and the lien therein described is discharged.

So ordered.

GAFFNEY, J.

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ORDER The respondent has failed to establish probable cause to support a finding that the construction services he provided were provided "by virtue of an agreement with or the consent of the [applicant] or by the consent of some person having authority from or rightfully acting for [the applicant]. . ." Newtown Associates v. Northeast Structures, Inc., 15 Conn. App. 633, 637 (1988). More specifically, there is no evidence of an agreement or of the kind of consent required by law. Avery v. Smith, 96 Conn. 223,228 (1921); Newtown Associates v. Northeast Structures, Inc., supra 640.

The application is granted and the lien therein described is discharged.

So ordered.

GAFFNEY, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wooster-associates-v-lates-no-099552-jan-7-1991-connsuperct-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack