Free Proposed Jury Instructions/Request to Charge - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 19.4 kB
Pages: 2
Date: April 5, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 452 Words, 2,771 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/15591/172.pdf

Download Proposed Jury Instructions/Request to Charge - District Court of Connecticut ( 19.4 kB)


Preview Proposed Jury Instructions/Request to Charge - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 172

Filed 04/05/2008

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PETER D. MAINS and LORI M. MAINS Plaintiffs, v. SEA RAY BOATS, INC. Defendant. : CASE NO. 3:01cv2402 (AWT) : : : : : : : APRIL 5, 2008

DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENT TO PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS Pursuant to the Court's request that the parties submit a proposed definition of the term "revocation" as used in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42a-2-608, Sea Ray submits the following proposed definition of that term. The parties have conferred, but have been unable to agree upon such a definition. Sea Ray proposes the following definition of revocation: A revocation is an "an annulment, cancellation, or reversal."1 Revocation requires more than notifying the alleged seller that the goods are in breach of the purchase agreement.2 The notice of revocation must unequivocally notify the seller that the buyer is canceling his acceptance of the goods,3 and must indicate that the buyer is asserting a legal right to return the goods, and not merely requesting or recommending that the goods be returned or exchanged.4

1 2

Black's Law Dictionary at 1346 (Bryan A. Garner, Ed.)(8th Ed. 2004).

Uniform Laws Annotated, Vol. 1B, Uniform Commercial Code (2004) § 2-608 at 776 ¶ 5 ("More will generally be necessary than the mere notification of breach required under the preceding section."); id. at 779 (citing Export Corp. v. North Pacific Lumber Co., Inc., 764 F. Supp. 608 (D. Or. 1991) ("Proof of revocation of acceptance is judged by a stricter standard that notification of breach."). Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42a-2-608 (2) (notice must be to seller); 1 James J. White & Robert S. Summers, Uniform Commercial Code § 8-4, at 572 (5th ed. 2006) (notice must be unequivocal). Luson Int'l Distributors, Inc. v. Fabricating & Production Machinery, Inc., 966 F.2d 9, 11-12 (1st Cir. 1992).
4 3

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 172

Filed 04/05/2008

Page 2 of 2

Respectfully submitted, DEFENDANT, SEA RAY BOATS, INC.

By

/s/ Daniel J. Foster James H. Rotondo (ct05173) Daniel J. Foster (ct 24975) Day Pitney LLP 242 Trumbull Street Hartford, Connecticut 06103-1212 (860) 275-0100 (860) 275-0343 (fax) Its Attorney

CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that on this date a copy of foregoing Defendant's Supplement to Proposed Jury Instructions was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF System. /s/ Daniel J. Foster Daniel J. Foster (ct24975)

-2-