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. 42-152. Consumer contract to be written in plain language. (a) Standard. Every consumer contract entered into after June 30, 1980, shall be written in plain language. A consumer contract is written in plain language if it meets either the plain language tests of subsection (b) of this section or the alternate objective tests of subsection (c) of this section. A consumer contract need not meet the tests of both subsections.
(b) Plain language tests. A consumer contract is written in plain language if it substantially complies with all of the following tests:
(1) It uses short sentences and paragraphs; and
(2) It uses everyday words; and
(3) It uses personal pronouns, the actual or shortened names of the parties to the contract, or both, when referring to those parties; and
(4) It uses simple and active verb forms; and
(5) It uses type of readable size; and
(6) It uses ink which contrasts with the paper; and
(7) It heads sections and other subdivisions with captions which are in boldface type or which otherwise stand out significantly from the text; and
(8) It uses layout and spacing which separate the paragraphs and sections of the contract from each other and from the borders of the paper; and
(9) It is written and organized in a clear and coherent manner.
(c) Alternate objective tests. A consumer contract is also written in plain language if it fully meets all of the following tests, using the procedures described in section 42-158:
(1) The average number of words per sentence is less than twenty-two; and
(2) No sentence in the contract exceeds fifty words; and
(3) The average number of words per paragraph is less than seventy-five; and
(4) No paragraph in the contract exceeds one hundred fifty words; and
(5) The average number of syllables per word is less than 1.55; and
(6) It uses personal pronouns, the actual or shortened names of the parties to the contract, or both, when referring to those parties; and
(7) It uses no typeface of less than eight points in size; and
(8) It allows at least three-sixteenths of an inch of blank space between each paragraph and section; and
(9) It allows at least one-half of an inch of blank space at all borders of each page; and
(10) If the contract is printed, each section is captioned in boldface type at least ten points in size. If the contract is typewritten, each section is captioned and the captions are underlined; and
(11) It uses an average length of line of no more than sixty-five characters.
(P.A. 79-532, S. 2; June 12 Sp. Sess. P.A. 12-2, S. 75.)
Nov 27, 2023
Superior
Hartford County, CT
Jan 26, 2024
Hartford County
Hartford 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, : 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, 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, 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.