Developer brought action against town and its first selectman for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and negligent misrepresentation. Following jury verdict in favor of developer on claims for breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation, the Superior Court denied defendants’ motion to set aside the verdict. Defendants appealed.
The Appellate Court held that:
- Evidence was insufficient to support finding that first selectman had actual authority to bind town to contract with developer;
- Doctrine of apparent authority was inapplicable in context of municipal contract;
- Town council did not ratify contract by accepting benefits of contract; and
- First selectman did not know or have reason to know that her statement concerning town’s intentions during discussions with developer was false at the time she made it.