Suntech of Connecticut, Inc. v. Lawrence Brunoli, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the latest version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. *********************************************** SUNTECH OF CONNECTICUT, INC. v. LAWRENCE BRUNOLI, INC., ET AL. SC 19970 Robinson, C. J., and Palmer, Mullins, Kahn and Ecker, Js. Argued September 18—officially released October 16, 2018 Procedural History Action to recover damages for, inter alia, breach of contract, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Hartford and tried to the court, Wahla, J.; judgment for the defendants, from which the plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Court, Lavine, Beach and Bishop, Js., which affirmed the judgment of the trial court, and the plaintiff, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed. Matthew T. Wax-Krell, with whom, on the brief, were Lawrence G. Rosenthal and Denise Lucchio, for the appellant (plaintiff). Margaret Fogerty Rattigan, with whom were P. Jo Anne Burgh and, on the brief, Bradford R. Carver, Marissa I. Delinks and Valerie N. Doble, for the appellees (defendants). Opinion PER CURIAM. The plaintiff, Suntech of Connecticut, Inc., a Connecticut corporation that fabricates and installs glass and curtain walls, brought an action against the named defendant Lawrence Brunoli, Inc., a general contractor, and the defendant Safeco Insurance Company of America, a bonding company, alleging, inter alia, breach of its subcontract to provide labor and materials in connection with the construction of a technology center at Naugatuck Valley Community College, which is owned by the state. See Suntech of Connecticut, Inc. v. Lawrence Brunoli, Inc., 173 Conn. App. 321, 324–25, 164 A.3d 36 (2017). The plaintiff now appeals, upon our grant of its petition for certification,1 from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a trial to the court, in favor of the defendants. Id., 324. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the Appellate Court improperly concluded that the trial court had not committed harmful error when it (1) precluded the plaintiff’s fact witness, Rick Cianfaglione, an independent consultant who had been hired by the state to evaluate the scheduling and duration of the construction project, from testifying as to his observations and perceptions about the project site, and (2) refused to permit the plaintiff’s counsel to make an offer of proof, including by disregarding relevant portions of Cianfaglione’s deposition transcript. After examining the entire record on appeal and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted. The appeal is dismissed. 1 We granted the plaintiff’s petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following issue: ‘‘Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the plaintiff failed to prove that the trial court committed harmful error when it precluded the plaintiff’s fact witness, Rick Cianfaglione, from testifying as to his observations and perceptions, not permitting the plaintiff’s counsel to make an offer of proof, and disregarding Cianfaglione’s deposition transcript?’’ Suntech of Connecticut, Inc. v. Lawrence Brunoli, Inc., 326 Conn. 923, 169 A.3d 234 (2017).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
