Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Food Studio, Inc. v. Fabiola's, 56 Conn. App. 858 (2000)

Citation
Food Studio, Inc. v. Fabiola's, 56 Conn. App. 858 (2000)
Parent Document
Food Studio, Inc. v. Fabiola's, 56 Conn. App. 858 (2000)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2000-03-14

Other Sections in This Document (30)

Full Text

542 chars
The plaintiffs argument is essentially that at the time it brought suit, it was necessary to employ an attorney to prompt the defendant to make timely payments under the sublease. Our careful review of the record leads us to the conclusion that the court, on the basis of its findings, made an informed and logical decision on the issue of attorney’s fees under the sublease and, in reaching its decision, did not exceed its discretion. Because we find no abuse of the court’s discretion, the plaintiffs claim must fail. B The Equipment Lease