Wright v. Cypress General Contractors, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that statute of limitations for contract claims was not tolled where defendants and the plaintiffs had contracted for the “ ‘performing of a specific, definable act,’ i.e., the construction of a roof’
• holding that General Statutes § 52-576 barred a breach of warranty action because injury was inflicted when defendant completed construction on a defective roof more than CT Page 2426 six years before action was commenced
• concerning contractual duty stemming from defendants’ installation of defective roof on building constructed by plaintiffs
• treating fraudulent concealment as a form of the fraud of misrepresentation
• “In order to raise a claim of fraudulent concealment, the party challenging a statute of limitations defense must affirmatively plead it.”
• repairs not sufficient unless there is evidence repairs were made in order to avoid lawsuit and party actually relied upon repairs in not filing suit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).