DocketNumber: No. CV95 0050619 S
Citation Numbers: 1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 3891
Judges: RIPLEY, J.
Filed Date: 4/1/1996
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/17/2021
The motion to dismiss is denied in its entirety as this court has jurisdiction to hear the claims that arise under state law. The 1992 Cable Act does not preempt causes of action under state law. See
Motion to Strike:
The first and second counts of the complaint sufficiently allege several unfair methods of competition which were allegedly conducted the defendants in this state. See General statutes §
The CUTPA counts allege numerous instances of alleged unfair competition by Time Warner. Judge Nevas stated, at page six of his ruling on the motion to remand to state court, that "Bridgeways incorporates the 1992 Cable Act's must carry provisions as one available criterion for determining whether Time Warner violated CUTPA." The allegations, as set out by the plaintiff, may provide a vehicle for the CUTPA violations to be proven.
In sum, the court finds that the plaintiff has sufficiently alleged facts, which if proven, may rise to the level of a CUTPA violation. See Normand Josef Enterprises, Inc. v. ConnecticutNational Bank,
Finally, the plaintiff's allegations in the third, fourth and fifth counts, which the court must view in a light most favorable to the plaintiff; RK Construction, Inc. v. Fusco Corp.,
Accordingly, the motion to dismiss and the motion to strike are both denied in their entirety.
RIPLEY, J.