AC40164 - Abrams v. PH Architects, LLC ("This appeal arises out of a dispute between a homeowner and
the architectural firm and general contractor that he hired to design and
perform substantial renovations to his home and surrounding property in
Greenwich. The plaintiff, Marc Abrams, appeals, following a trial to the court,
from the judgment rendered against him on his complaint and on the counterclaims
of the defendants, PH Architects, LLC (PH), and V.A.S. Construction, Inc.
(VAS). The plaintiff claims on appeal that the court improperly (1) failed to
enforce provisions in his contracts with VAS and PH related to the processing of
change orders and invoices; (2) failed to find that VAS had breached a separate
contract governing the construction of a stone wall and fence on the property;
(3) failed to enforce provisions in his contract with PH pursuant to which PH
agreed to provide contract administration services; (4) failed to conclude that
PH was liable for professional negligence because it had breached the
professional standard of care for architects; and (5) made clearly erroneous
factual findings with respect to a ‘punch list’ that was prepared on behalf of the
plaintiff by a third party. We are not persuaded by the plaintiff’s claims and,
accordingly, affirm the judgment of the court.")
AC39617 - National Waste Associates, LLC v. Scharf ("The plaintiff, National Waste Associates, LLC, appeals from
the judgment of the trial court rendered, in part, in favor of the defendants,
Danielle Scharf, Carl Slusarczyk, Waste Harmonics, LLC (Waste Harmonics), and
Omega Waste Management, Inc. (Omega). On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the
court improperly concluded that (1) the plaintiff could not prevail on its
unjust enrichment claims, (2) a nonsolicitation provision in agreements between
the plaintiff and its former employees was unenforceable as to its prospective
customers, and (3) General Statutes § 35-57 (a) bars its claims under the
Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes § 42-110a et
seq. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")