Paul v. McPhee Electrical Contractors

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an electrician who installed a light fixture was not a product seller under the CPLA since there was no indication that the electrician was \involved in placing light fixtures into the stream of commerce\
• holding that an electrician who installed a light fixture was not a product seller under the CPLA since there was no indication that the electrician was \involved in placing light fixtures into the stream of commerce\
• electrician was not product seller because he merely installed light fixture and was not responsible for placing it in stream of commerce
• legislature may be presumed to know state of law governing subject matter of legislation
• no apportionment claim permitted based on allegations of product liability

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Allard v. Liberty Oil Equipment Co.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2000-07-25· cited 49×
• Ferrucci v. Atlantic City Showboat, Inc.
  D. Connecticut· 1999-03-29· cited 2×
• Normandy v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-08-09

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Daily v. New Britain Machine Co.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-07-22· cited 284×
• Winslow v. Lewis-Shepard, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-08-08· cited 154×
• Johnson v. Manson
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-05-28· cited 131×
• Rodia v. Tesco Corp.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1987-06-30· cited 51×
• Commissioner of Administrative Services v. Gerace
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1996-04-02· cited 11×
• Department of Administrative Services v. Gerace
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-01-21· cited 7×