NEGRON v. WINER (2020)

SUMMARY ORDER

Jason Winer appeals from a judgment following a bench trial conducted by the District Court (Hall, J.), in which Winer was found liable for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, violation of Connecticut’s Retail Installment Sales Finance Act (RISFA), and violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110a et seq. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and prior record of proceedings, to which we refer only as necessary to explain our decision to affirm.

On appeal, Winer argues that the District Court erred in exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims of Coralys and Francisco Negron. Winer also argues that the District Court erred in finding Winer liable under CUTPA for two primary reasons: first, the price written on the windshield of the vehicle in question was not an “advertisement,” as defined under Conn. Agencies Regs. § 42-110b-28(a)(3), a regulation promulgated by the Department of Consumer Protection under CUTPA; and second, Winer was not a licensed used car dealer as he claims is required to be liable under § 42-110b-28(b)(1).¹

We reject Winer’s arguments for substantially the reasons provided by the District Court in its thorough May 7, 2019 opinion.

We have considered Winer’s remaining arguments and conclude that they are without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Winer has abandoned his other claims and challenges, including those relating to the District Court’s findings of liability for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability and for violation of RISFA. See Morrison v. Johnson, 429 F.3d 48, 52 (2d Cir. 2005).