Ardoin v. Allstate Insurance Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that failure to comply with Home Improvement Act “is a per se violation of CUTPA by virtue of General Statutes § 20-427 (b), which provides that any violation of the Home Improvement Act is deemed to be an unfair or deceptive trade practice”
• denying recovery on CUTPA claim on ground that homeowner had not proven any loss or injury for which he could recover
• denying recovery on CUTPA claim on ground that homeowner had not proven any loss or injury for which he could recover
• contractor who failed to comply with the Act cannot recover under theory of quantum meruit
• “While CUTPA damages need not be proven with absolute precision, the failure to present any evidence concerning the nature and extent of the injury sustained precludes recovery under the statute.” (emphasis added)
• refusal to enforce nonconforming home improvement agreement under theory of quasi contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).