DocketNumber: No. CV 99-0592027
Citation Numbers: 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 10387
Judges: HENNESSEY, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 8/6/2002
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
This court finds from the evidence presented that the defendant's labor costs for removal of the defective light fixtures would be requested by Capital Light Supply Co. (CLS) of the manufacturer of those fixtures. CLS saw this as the manufacturer's responsibility and Maklari did not disagree with that position. Regarding these labor costs the defendant's CT Page 10388 testimony was that he heard nothing further from CLS and that he "really dropped the whole thing."
In view of the fact that there was some question as to who was responsible for the labor costs of removing the defective fixtures this court finds that the defendant has not established. by a preponderance of the evidence that Maklari is entitled to the claimed $2,625 from CLS.
_____________________ Hennessey, J.