News Archive Search 
Search news from August '13 to present.
Search for news prior to August '13.
Monthly News Archives
CLICK HERE to sign up to be notified when the DOT number database is updated.
Tag Archives: an Act Concerning Automotive Glass Work
Safelite, Connecticut Attorney General Reach Settlement over Anti-Steering Law
Safelite Group, Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen and Thomas Leonardi, state insurance commissioner, have “agreed in principle on the major terms of a settlement and have begun preparing definitive documents memorializing the agreement,” the parties’ attorneys have reported to the U.S. District Court of Connecticut. Continue reading
Safelite, Connecticut Attorney General in Negotiations to Settle Anti-Steering Law Dispute
Safelite Group and Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen and Thomas Leonardi, state insurance commissioner, are “discussing whether a consensual resolution of all the issues raised in Safelite’s complaint” is possible. Continue reading
Safelite’s Subpoenas Sent to Six AGRR Companies Over Anti-Steering Law on Hold
Six AGRR companies have withdrawn their motions to quash Safelite Group’s subpoenas over Connecticut’s Act Concerning Automotive Glass Work (Public Act 13-67) in the U.S. District Court of Connecticut after the companies have agreed to place the subpoenas “on hold.” Continue reading
Posted in glassBYTEs Original Story Tagged Action Glass, AGRR, AGRR magazine, an Act Concerning Automotive Glass Work, Auto Glass of New England Hamden, automotive glass, Binswanger Glass, Connecticut Anti Steering Law, glassBYTEs.com, Goulet Glass Inc., LYNX Services, Payless Auto Glass, Plymouth Glass & Mirror, Public Act 13-67, Safelite Group, Safelite Solutions, Sullivan Glass 1 Comment
Second Circuit Court Denies Preliminary Injunction in Connecticut Anti-Steering Case, Grants Expedited Appeal
A judges’ panel for the Second Circuit Court has denied Safelite’s motion for an injunction halting enforcement of Public Act 13-67 (an Act Concerning Automotive Glass Work), which went into effect January 1, writing that Safelite “failed to meet the requisite standard.” The judges granted Safelite’s motion to expedite the appeal. Continue reading