[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]
ORDER
The court reaffirms its earlier ruling denying the defendant's motion to strike count seven of the complaint alleging violation of General Statutes § 42-110a et seq. the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA). The defendant insists that a consumer relationship must exist between the parties for a plaintiff to state a claim for violation of CUTPA. However, Connecticut courts have stated that "the application of CUTPA does not depend upon a consumer relationship." Larsen Chelsey Realty Co. v. Larsen, 232Conn.480,496, 656A.2d1009 (1995); see also Thames River Recycling, Inc. v.Gallo, 50Conn. App.767, 720A.2d242 (1998).