Glover v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc. (Concurrence)

Summary

Justice Ecker fully joins part I and concurs in part II because existing precedent requires treating the Connecticut Product Liability Act as the exclusive remedy for a CUTPA claim seeking damages for personal injuries caused by a defective product. The concurrence questions that precedent, reasoning that the statutory text and legislative history may not extend exclusivity to statutory claims and that CUTPA might instead be asserted within the product-liability framework. Because the plaintiffs did not challenge the prior construction, the concurrence reluctantly accepts the result.