Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
Sec. 42a-2A-732. Effect of acceptance; notice of default; burden of establishing default after acceptance; notice of claim or litigation to person answerable over. (a) A lessee shall pay rent in accordance with the lease contract for any goods accepted.
(b) Acceptance of goods by a lessee precludes rejection of the goods accepted but does not by itself impair any other remedy provided by this article or the lease agreement for nonconformity.
(c) If a tender of delivery has been accepted, the following rules apply:
(1) The lessee, or a person entitled to enforce a warranty or warranty obligation, shall notify the party claimed against within a reasonable time after the default or breach of warranty was discovered or should have been discovered. However, a failure to give timely notice bars the lessee from a remedy only to the extent that the party entitled to notice establishes that the party was prejudiced by the failure.
(2) Except in the case of a consumer lease, if a claim for infringement or the like is made against a lessee for which a lessor or supplier is answerable over and the lessee is sued as a result of such claim, the lessee shall notify the lessor or supplier within a reasonable time after receiving notice of the litigation or be barred from any remedy over for liability established by the litigation.
(d) A lessee has the burden of establishing a default with respect to goods accepted. A person entitled to enforce a warranty obligation under section 42a-2A-508 has the burden of establishing that the warranty was breached.
(e) In a claim for breach of a warranty, indemnity or other obligation against the lessee for which another party is answerable over, the following rules apply:
(1) The lessee may give notice of the litigation to the other party in a record, and the person notified may then give similar notice of the litigation to any other person that is answerable over. If the notice invites the person notified to intervene in the litigation and defend and states that failure to do so will bind the person notified in any action later brought by the lessor as to any determination of fact common to the two actions, the person notified is so bound, unless, after seasonable receipt of the notice, the person notified intervenes in the litigation and defends.
(2) If the claim is one for infringement or the like, the original lessor or supplier may demand in a record that its lessee turn over control of the litigation, including settlement, or otherwise be barred from any remedy over. If the lessor or supplier also agrees to bear all expense and to satisfy any adverse judgment, the lessee is so barred unless, after seasonable receipt of the demand, control is turned over to the lessor or supplier.
(f) Subsections (c), (d) and (e) of this section apply to an obligation of a lessee to hold the lessor or the supplier harmless against infringement or the like.
(P.A. 02-131, S. 85.)
Nov 27, 2023
Superior
Hartford County, CT
Mar 10, 2015
New Haven County
New Haven County, CT
HFH-CV22-6019756-S Superior Court Ansonia Acquisitions I, LLC, Housing Session d/b/a Woodcliff Estates (80 Washington Street Hartford, CT 06106) v. Annette Rodriguez …
Mar 28, 2022
DOCKET NO.: NNH CV-12-6031105S = : SUPERIOR COURT NRT NEW ENGLAND LLC d/b/a Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN V. : ATNEW HAVEN CHRISTOPHER G. L. JONES : SEPTEMBER 23, 2014 MEMORANDUM OF DECISION On July 28, 2014 this court rendered a Memorandum of Decision finding that the plaintiff had proven damages of $34,375.00 on the second count. This court scheduled a hearing to determine the amount of attorney’s fees and costs, and the amount of the total judgmen…
Jul 10, 2012
No. FST-CV15-5014471-S JEREMY COLLINS, f SUPERIOR COURT MOLLY MCCULLOUGH : Plaintiffs i JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD vs. : AT STAMFORD MARGARET MONTANARO Defendant : March 9, 2015 REVISED COMPLAINT FIRST COUNT 1 This is an action brought under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (hereinafter, "CUTPA"), Chapter 735a Section 42-110g of the Connecticut General Statutes in order to obtain relief against Defendant for alleged violations of General Statutes Section 42-110b(a), prohibiting …
Feb 17, 2015
No. FST-CV15-5014471-S JEREMY COLLINS, : SUPERIOR COURT MOLLY MCCULLOUGH Plaintiffs : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD vs. | AT STAMFORD MARGARET MONTANARO Defendant : March 9, 2015 AMENDED COMPLA FIRST COUNT 1. is is an action brought under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (hereinafter, "CUTPA"), Chapter 735a Section 42-110g of the Connecticut General Statutes in order to obtain relief against Defendant for alleged violations of General Statutes Section 42-11 0b(a), prohibiting u…
Feb 17, 2015
No. FST-CV15-5014471-S JEREMY COLLINS, z SUPERIOR COURT MOLLY MCCULLOUGH ie Plaintiffs : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD vs. AT STAMFORD MARGARET MONTANARO Defendant : April 24, 2015 REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT In the above entitled action, the Plaintiffs respectfully request that they be granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint, which is appended to this request, pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book 10-60(a)(3). BY: St MA. e Jeremy Collins & Molly Mc@ulloug…
Feb 17, 2015
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.