Connecticut Court of Appeals, 1998

BICC Brand-Rex Co. v. Arthur, Harris & Associates, Inc.

BICC Brand-Rex Co. v. Arthur, Harris & Associates, Inc.
Connecticut Court of Appeals · Decided April 14, 1998
48 Conn. App. 423; 706 A.2d 1391; 1998 Conn. App. LEXIS 173

BICC Brand-Rex Co. v. Arthur, Harris & Associates, Inc.

Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal implicates Connecticut’s corporate long arm service of process statute. General Statutes § 33-929 (f) (1). The dispositive issue in this case is whether the contract between the parties was to be substantially performed in this state. The trial court found as a fact that the contract was to be substantially performed outside Connecticut. That factual finding was supported by the evidence and, thus, cannot be overturned by this court. See Cromwell Commons Associates v. Koziura, 21 Conn. App. 1, 5, 570 A.2d 1131 (1990).

The judgment is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.