Gabriele v. Brino

How courts have described this case

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

• ‘‘[a]lthough under certain circumstances, the court may read documents together to satisfy the statute of frauds . . . the multi- ple writings still must state the essential terms of the contract without the use of parol proof’’ [citation omit- ted]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

• T & M Building Co. v. Hastings
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2019-11-26· cited 4×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• DeLuca v. C. W. Blakeslee & Sons, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1978-04-10· cited 86×
• Vachon v. Tomascak
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1967-05-03· cited 30×
• Killion v. Davis
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2002-04-23· cited 8×