[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]
ORDERThe court reaffirms its earlier ruling denying the defendant's motion to strike count seven of the complaint alleging violation of General Statutes §
42-110a et seq. the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA). The defendant insists that a consumer relationship must exist between the parties for a plaintiff to state a claim for violation of CUTPA. However, Connecticut courts have stated that "the application of CUTPA does not depend upon a consumer relationship."
Larsen Chelsey Realty Co. v. Larsen,
232 Conn. 480,
496,
656 A.2d 1009 (1995); see also
Thames River Recycling, Inc. v.Gallo,
50 Conn. App. 767,
720 A.2d 242 (1998).
HICKEY, J.