Tzovolos v. Wiseman, 12 A.3d 563

Two related actions involve ownership and security interests in restaurant equipment; trial court consolidated after transfer of one action and cross-claims were filed.
Plaintiffs (Basile Tzovolos and Olympia Tzovolos) alleged Wiseman and Seawind breached a purchase agreement, failed payments, promissory note default, unjust enrichment, conversion, and CUTPA violations.
Hartmann, Sr., Hartmann, Jr., Jason Hartmann, Jason Robert's Concrete, and Jason Robert's, Inc. were alleged to have engaged in fraudulent transfer, personal liability for corporate debts, and tortious interference.
Alpert Realty, LLC possessed the equipment and allegedly violated CUTPA and interfered with plaintiffs’ contractual relations; it sought indemnification from Hartmann entities.
Jason Robert's, as plaintiff in the second action, asserted a security interest in the equipment located on Alpert Realty’s premises and claimed access rights to remove it.
Trial court entered multi-faceted judgments: plaintiffs win on several claims; Alpert Realty awarded indemnification; Hartmann defendants and others faced liability; second action resulted in a judgment against Jason Robert's.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jury trial entitlement and procedural timing	Hartmanns deny jury request; pleadings opened late.	Court properly denied untimely jury demand and noted prior rulings.	Affirmed on the trial management and jury-trial timing matters.
Security interest recognition and priority	Jason Robert's validly holds a security interest in the equipment.	Alpert Realty and others challenge enforceability/priority of security interests.	Court upheld plaintiffs’ security interest findings.
Admission of value testimony	Value testimony is admissible to support damages.	Value of equipment improperly admitted.	Evidence properly admitted or rejected as trial court found.
Conversion and fraudulent transfer findings	Hartmann defendants converted equipment and engaged in fraudulent transfer.	Lack of good faith or basis for conversion/transfer.	Court found conversion and fraudulent conveyance by Hartmann defendants.
CUTPA liability and personal liability for corporate debts	Hartmann entities violated CUTPA and personal liability applies for corporate debts.	No CUTPA violation or improper piercing of corporate veil.	Hartmann defendants liable for CUTPA and personal liability established.

Socha v. Bordeau, 289 Conn. 358 (Conn. 2008) (affirms approach to limiting review and avoiding unnecessary repetition of trial court reasoning)
Lord Family of Windsor, LLC v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Commission, 288 Conn. 669 (Conn. 2008) (emphasizes deference to comprehensive trial court memoranda in appellate review)