10/30/2009
AC29856 - 418 Meadow Street Associates, LLC v. One Solution Services, LLC ("On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly denied its motion to dismiss because (1) the commencement of the action was not properly authorized in accordance with the plaintiff’s operating agreement, (2) the plaintiff failed to prove that the authorizing vote of one of its members was properly excluded under General Statutes § 34-187 (b) and (3) the plaintiff’s mortgagee had exercised its right to collect rents due from the defendant to the plaintiff pursuant to a previously executed assignment of leases and rentals.")
AC29796, AC29906 - Brownstein v. Spilke ("In AC 29796, Diamond claims that the court improperly determined that it failed to prove the fair market value of the subject property as of the date title vested in Diamond following a judgment of foreclosure and that it would be inequitable to grant the deficiency judgment. In AC 29906, Georgina Spilke contends that the defendant’s claim regarding the deficiency judgment is barred by the doctrine of res judicata.")
AC29404 - State v. Adams ("The defendant claims that the court improperly failed to return property that was seized from him in criminal docket number CR-05-0284632-S, a case in which a nolle prosequi was entered pursuant to a plea agreement involving a total of six cases against the defendant.")
10/2/2009
AC28926 - Milford Paintball, LLC v. Wampus Milford Associates, LLC ("On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly concluded that the lease agreement had never become effective and, as a result, improperly found in favor of the plaintiffs on their complaint and failed to find in favor of the defendant on its special defenses and counterclaim. The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the lease agreement was ever effective.")
AC29269 - Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Litchfield Housing Authority ("The complainant claims that the court (1) improperly denied her right to intervene and, in the alternative, (2) abused its discretion in denying her permissive intervention. The defendants claim that (1) there is no final judgment for purposes of appeal because the complainant has no colorable claim for intervention as of right and (2) on the merits, the court properly denied her claim for intervention as of right and did not abuse its discretion in denying her permissive intervention. The commission claims that the complainant should be allowed permissive intervention.")
AC29177 - Milford v. Maykut ("The plaintiff claims that the court improperly awarded the defendants compensation for the diminution in value of a hypothetical lot of a subdivision when there was no evidence that a subdivision could be achieved within a reasonable time.")
AC29516 - D'Amato Investments, LLC v. Sutton ("This case involves the interpretation of a commercial lease and a personal guarantee of that lease. The plaintiff, D’Amato Investments, LLC, brought this action against the defendant, David Sutton, to recover the amount allegedly due under a commercial lease between the plaintiff and Chimaera, Inc. (Chimaera), pursuant to a guarantee signed by the defendant.")
AC30144 - McCook v. Whitebirch Construction, LLC ("On appeal, McCook claims that the court improperly (1) declined to admit certain checks into evidence at the hearing on the motions to enforce the settlement agreement, (2) found the terms of the settlement agreement to be clear and unambiguous, (3) granted Lenihan relief beyond the scope of the settlement by awarding it attorney’s fees and interest, (4) refused to articulate its reasons for declining to admit the checks into evidence and (5) unconstitutionally denied him a fair trial by (a) refusing to allow him to finish testifying and (b) at the time the case was reported to be settled, failing to canvass the parties to determine whether they understood the terms of the settlement agreement.")
AC29785 - Rissolo v. Betts Island Oyster Farms, LLC ("This is an appeal from two matters, Rissolo v. Betts Island Oyster Farms, LLC, and Lovejoy v. Rissolo, formally consolidated by motion on the second day of trial on November 28, 2007. Both cases are essentially partition actions, with the Lovejoy case seeking additional relief in a count for damages for a breach of contract. The trial court ordered a partition by sale and awarded damages to Frederick A. Lovejoy, the substitute defendant in the first case and the plaintiff in the second case, from which he now appeals.")
AC29834 - Mansfield v. A & M Automotive ("The plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) concluded that the defendant did not violate General Statutes § 14-145a, (2) failed to find that the defendant was liable for conversion and (3) failed to find that the defendant’s actions constituted a violation of General Statutes § 42-110a et seq., the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA)...Red Brick and El Dorado shared use of a parking lot, and El Dorado had an arrangement with Red Brick such that Red Brick allowed El Dorado’s tenants to park in certain areas.") 9/28/2009Coldwell Banker Manning Realty, Inc. v. Computer Sciences — SC18223 ("This is the second of two appeals brought by the plaintiff, Coldwell Banker Manning Realty, Inc. (Coldwell Banker), in connection with a real estate transaction involving Coldwell Banker, the defendant, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), and Cushman and Wakefield of Connecticut, Inc. (Cushman). In the present appeal, Coldwell Banker claims that the trial court improperly concluded that the decision of the Greater Hartford Association of Realtors, Inc. (association), to dismiss as untimely Coldwell Banker’s request for arbitration of its claims against CSC constituted an arbitration award for purposes of General Statutes § 52-417,3 and, as a result, the court improperly confirmed the alleged award. Coldwell Banker further contends that the trial court improperly (1) granted CSC’s motion to stay pending arbitration, thus compelling Coldwell Banker to arbitrate with a third party who was not a signatory to any contract or a member of any association to which Coldwell Banker also belonged that required arbitration, (2) determined that a contract existed between Coldwell Banker and the association when there was no admission by the parties that there was such a contract and no evidence presented to support that fact, and (3) determined that CSC was entitled to enforce the arbitration provisions of the association’s bylaws and code of ethics as a third party beneficiary. CSC responds that the trial court properly determined that the association’s dismissal of the arbitration request as untimely constituted an award subject to confirmation by the trial court and, therefore, that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider Coldwell Banker’s claims against CSC. CSC also argues that the trial court properly stayed Coldwell Banker’s claims pending arbitration because (1) Coldwell Banker’s agreement to arbitrate contractual disputes with its clients pursuant to the association’s bylaws and code of ethics is enforceable, (2) CSC was an intended third party beneficiary of the arbitration agreement, and (3) an intended third party beneficiary of an arbitration agreement may enforce a promise to arbitrate.")
Coldwell Banker Manning Realty, Inc. v. Cushman & Wakefield of Connecticut, Inc. — SC18222 ("This is one of two separate appeals arising out of a real estate transaction involving the plaintiff, Coldwell Banker Manning Realty, Inc. (Coldwell Banker), the named defendant, Cushman and Wakefield of Connecticut, Inc. (Cushman), and Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). In the present appeal, Coldwell Banker claims that the trial court improperly concluded that the decision of the Greater Hartford Association of Realtors, Inc. (association), to dismiss as untimely Coldwell Banker’s request for arbitration of claims against Cushman constituted an arbitration award for purposes of General Statutes § 52- 4174 and, therefore, that the court’s confirmation of the alleged award and its subsequent dismissal of Coldwell Banker’s claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction also were improper. Coldwell Banker further contends that the trial court improperly concluded that its request for arbitration (1) was unrestricted, (2) applied to the two individual defendants, namely, Joel M. Grieco and Robert E. Kelly, who served as Cushman’s agents during the real estate transaction, and (3) encompassed several claims that, according to Coldwell Banker, were not contained in its request. Cushman responds that the trial court properly determined that the association’s dismissal of the arbitration request as untimely constituted an arbitration award subject to confirmation by the trial court and, therefore, that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider Coldwell Banker’s claims. It also contends that Coldwell Banker’s arbitration request was unrestricted and, consequently, applied to Grieco and Kelly, and to both the contract and noncontract claims. Cushman finally contends that the trial court’s judgment may be affirmed on the alternate ground that, even if this court concludes that the award applies only to the contract claims against Cushman, the trial court had no jurisdiction over the noncontract claims and the claims against Grieco and Kelly because those claims are exclusively arbitrable and there has been no arbitration.")
9/3/2009
AC29642 - Byars v. Berg ("The plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that his claims are precluded under the doctrine of collateral estoppel.")
AC29835- Tsionis v. Martens ("On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that (1) the court improperly determined that a contract existed between the parties and (2) in the alternative, if a contract did exist, then the court improperly determined that the contract was not terminated under the mortgage contingency clause.")
AC30199 - Tuccio Custom Homes, LLC v. Lamonica (“The plaintiff contends that the court improperly concluded that the action was barred by res judicata.”)
7/31/2009
Fairchild Heights, Inc. v. Amaro - SC18305 (“In this appeal, we consider whether a municipal tax lien on a mobile home was extinguished when that mobile home was determined to have been abandoned and then sold at a public auction pursuant to General Statutes § 21-80 (e). The plaintiff…appeals from the judgments of the trial court denying its motion for an order conveying good title to, and a release of all liens upon, two abandoned mobile homes in the plaintiff’s mobile manufactured home park. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the judgments of the trial court were improper because the language of § 21-80 (e) (4) clearly and unambiguously provides that all existing liens on the mobile homes, including the municipal tax liens held by the city of Shelton (city), were extinguished upon the court ordered sale of the mobile homes.”) 7/27/2009
Aspetuck Valley Country Club, Inc. v. Weston - SC18105 (“This appeal arises from the decision of the tax assessor of the defendant, the town of Weston, denying the application of the plaintiff, Aspetuck Valley Country Club, Inc., for classification of certain of its golf course property as open space land pursuant to General Statutes § 12-107e.”) 7/20/2009
Bender v. Bender SC18306 (Specific performance of a contract for sale of real property held by an estate; res judicata; "The principal issue in this appeal is whether res judicata barred the plaintiffs from bringing an action in the Superior Court for breach of contract and specific performance of the contract after the Probate Court had denied the plaintiffs’ petition for an order for specific performance of the contract.") 7/6/2009
AC29923, AC30224 - Utzler v. Braca ("This case concerns numerous claims arising out of a contract between an investor and a builder for the construction and sale of a luxury home in Westport.... In the principal appeal, the investor challenges the judgment in favor of the wife, and the builder cross appeals from the judgment in favor of the investor. In the second appeal, the builder and his wife contest the continuing validity of two prejudgment attachments of their properties.")
AC29526 - Goodspeed Airport , LLC v. East Haddam ("On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) denied the plaintiff any relief for the defendant’s wrongful refusal to grant an open space classification and (2) concluded that the plaintiff was not entitled to classification for additional acreage of its property as open space pursuant to General Statutes § 12-107e.")
AC29217 - LaBow v. LaBow ("The named defendant, Myrna LaBow, appeals from the judgment of the trial court ordering a distribution of the proceeds from the partition sale of certain property with 50 percent awarded to the defendant and 50 percent to the plaintiff Robert Rubin. Specifically, the defendant argues that the court denied her right to due process when it ordered this distribution without conducting an evidentiary hearing.")
7/2/2009
Waterbury Twin, LLC v. Renal Treatment Centers-Northeast, Inc. - SC18218 (“The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether a landlord, after withdrawing its complaint in a summary process action, is required to serve a new notice to quit pursuant to General Statutes § 47a-231 prior to filing a new summary process action against its tenant.”)
6/4/2009
PJM Associates, LC v. Bridgeport - SC18229 ("The principal issue in this joint appeal is whether a municipal tax assessor, in determining the present value of real property used primarily for the purpose of producing rental income, has authority under General Statutes § 12-63c to compel the filing of income and expense reports by the property owner in years in which there is no citywide revaluation or interim revaluation of properties in the same class as the owner’s property.") 6/2/2009
AC29927 - South Windsor Cemetery Assn., Inc. v. Lindquist ("On appeal, the defendant claims that (1)the court improperly granted the plaintiff’s motion to strike four counts of his seven count counterclaim and (2) he was deprived of due process of law.")
AC29793 - Silver v. Holtman ("In this appeal, we examine the narrow issue of whether the plaintiff Charles S. Silver has standing to seek a writ of mandamus to order the defendant town clerk of East Granby, Elisabeth W. Birmingham, to re-record an affidavit of facts (affidavit). We also determine whether the plaintiff Gail McCue, as executrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Walter T. McCue, Jr., has standing to bring an action for damages.")
AC29289 - Heyse v. Case ("In this case, the principal issue is whether a title insurance policy provided coverage for a dispute about subdivision rights between the insured and another member of a planned community organized under General Statutes § 47-220. Concluding that two exclusions in the insured’s policy establish that she has no coverage for this dispute, the trial court granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment. The insured has appealed.") 5/26/2009
J.C. Penney Corp. v. Manchester - SC18141 (Tax appeal; Whether..."trial court improperly concluded that...the plaintiff did not meet the applicable tax filing requirements, and, therefore, was not aggrieved and could not litigate its overvaluation claim.") 5/4/2009
AC29598 - Tuccio Development, Inc. v. Neumann ("The plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that there was no genuine issue of material fact, thus entitling the defendant to judgment as a matter of law.") 3/16/2009
St. Joseph's Living Center, Inc. v. Windham (SC17916)("[W]hether the defendant, the town of Windham (town), properly denied the application of the plaintiff, St. Joseph’s Living Center, Inc. (Center), a skilled nursing home facility, for a property tax exemption under General Statutes (Rev. to 2003) §12-81 (7) and General Statutes § 12-88.")
Leo Gold Et Al. v. Town East Haddam (SC18067) (Injunction; summary judgment; condemnation; statute of limitation; Plaintiffs sought permanent injunction barring town from condemning their property claiming that taking was barred because town had not condemned the property within 6 months of the referendum vote authorizing condemnation as per General Stautes §48-6(a). Defendants argues that §10-241a (which has no statute of limitation) applied to the condemnation instead of §48-6(a) because the land was to be used for school purposes. "[T]he dispositive question is whether there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the condemned property ‘‘has been fixed upon as a site . . . of a public school building’’ under §10-241a.")
3/3/2009AC28955 - Caminis v. Troy ("The principal issue in this case is whether protracted and prejudicial delay in establishing their littoral rights precludes upland property owners from receiving not only injunctive but also declaratory relief from their abutting neighbors.")
2/2/2009
- AC28844 - Young v. Young ("On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) found that the defendant had never quitclaimedto the plaintiff her interest in a property owned jointly by the parties, (2) failed to render judgment quieting title to the property in the plaintiff and (3) held that the plaintiff had not established a claim of title to the property via adverse possession.")
- AC29316 - Hescock v. Zoning Board of Appeals ("The plaintiffs claim that the court improperly (1) concluded that the approval of the defendants’ coastal site plan review application was supported by substantial evidence in the record, (2) concluded that the board complied with local flood zone regulations and (3) upheld the variance without substantial evidence of unusual hardship.")
- AC28981 - Kosinski v. Carr ("This case concerns a real estate transaction in which neither the warranty deed for the conveyance of the property nor the antecedent contract of sale disclosed that the defendant seller’s title was restricted by a covenant of record that forbade subdivision of the property.")
- AC29094 - Lee & Lamont Realty v. Planning & Zoning Commission ("The plaintiff claims impropriety in (1) the commission’s consideration of a memorandum from a commission member after the public hearing was closed and (2) the commission’s instituting a 200 foot buffer along an interstate highway.")
12/22/2008
Heussner v. Hayes- SC17979, SC17980 ("Probate appeal; whether an incorrect return date set by the Probate Court deprives the Superior Court of subject matter jurisdiction over a probate appeal after the appeal has been allowed by the Probate Court; motions to dismiss; standard of review of motion to dismiss.") 12/17/2008
Griswold Airport, Inc. v. Madison - SC17938 ("The primary issue before the court is whether a municipal tax assessor’s termination of an open space classification for property on the basis of its proposed use, as opposed to its current use, was proper. The outcome of this appeal turns on the proper interpretation of General Statutes (Rev. to 2003) § 12-504h, a provision that gives municipal tax assessors discretionary authority to remove open space classifications previously placed on real property within their municipalities when the use of that property has changed. See also General Statutes § 12-107e.") 12/1/2008
- AC27184 - Bloom v. Miklovich (“On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the court improperly (1) granted the defendants’ motion to strike counts two and three on the bases of misjoinder and nonjoinder and (2) granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss count four as unripe for adjudication.”)
- AC29181 - Motiva Enterprises, LLC v. Stratford (“The central issue in this appeal is whether the trial court improperly reduced the tax assessment of the plaintiff’s real property by giving improper weight to the testimony of the plaintiff’s appraiser.”)
10/16/2008
Socha v. Bordeau - SC18040 ("The plaintiff, Edward Socha, Jr., appeals from the judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendant, Scott Bordeau, on the plaintiff’s claims of trespass and for injunctive relief.") 7/23/2008
Greater Haven Property Owners Assn. v. New Haven SC 17900
(Real property; standing; whether city had authority pursuant to General Statutes §7-148(c)(7)(a) to adopt ordinance requiring owners of residential properties to submit application for licensure by city and permitting city to obtain administrative warrant to compel inspections of rental units when tenants refused access to inspectors; whether ordinance violated plaintiff's rights to due process under federal and state constitutions; whether ordinance constitutes a taking without just compensation) 7/21/2008
Pond View, LLC. v. Planning and Zoning Commission - SC17878
(Zoning; standing; whether court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the intervenors have raised only procedural issues and therefore do not have standing to bring this appeal as environmental intervenors pursuant to § 22a-19; whether intervenors have standing by virtue of having filed the protest petition in accordance with § 8-3 (b), which, they contend, created a personal and legal interest in, and made them ‘‘indispensable’’ parties to, the present action) 6/12/2008
Zulick v. Patrons Mutual Ins. Co. - SC18030 (Insurance; Personal Property; Whether the Coverage Limit in Homeowner's Insurance Policy for Personal Property Kept in Uninsured Residential Premises Applied to Personal Property Kept in a Barn and a Carriage House.) 6/2/2008
Rural Water Co. v. Zoning Board of Appeals - SC17959 (Zoning board appeal; inverse condemnation; self-created hardship; whether defendant's denial of plaintiff's application for zoning variances resulted in hardship to plaintiff and inverse condemnation of plaintiff's property; whether evidence at trial established that plaintiff's property was virtually worthless without variances). 5/27/2008
HH East Parcel, LLC v. Handy & Harman, Inc. - SC18055 (Arbitration; application to confirm arbitration award; application to vacate arbitration award; claim that clause in real estate contract constituted illegal penalty in violation of public policy; de novo standard of review of arbitration award). 5/19/2008
Cardinal Realty Investors, LLC v. Bernasconi - SC18095 (Summary process; whether evidence that boarding house room rented by defendant was extremely cluttered and contained three running refrigerators was sufficient to support reasonable inference that room conditions presented immediate and serious risk of fire and, therefore, constituted serious nuisance under summary process statute (§ 47a-15); claim that it was not within ordinary knowledge of jurors and judges that running three refrigerators in cluttered room, in an of itself, constituted immediate and serious fire hazard.) [Docket Summary] 5/5/2008
Breezy Knoll Assn., Inc. v. Morris - SC17815 [Municipal tax appeal; C.G.S. §12-117a;whether plaintiff's property had nominal value for tax purposes given that they were burdened by certain easements and restrictions] [docket summary]
4/28/2008
Bingham v. Dept. of Public Works - SC17817 [Administrative appeal; whether proposed sale of state owned property to municipalities was subject to environmental impact evaluation pursuant to state environmental policy law (§ 22a-1b [c]); aggrievement under Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (§ 4-166 et seq.).] [docket summary] 3/24/2008
The following Connecticut Supreme Court opinion was released today:
- Groton v. Mardie Lane Homes - SC17986
[docket summary] [Declaratory judgment action; summary judgment; whether the transaction through which the defendant acquired mortgage interest constituted a conveyance under § 8-26c, triggering the town's duty under the statute to call the performance bond]
2/19/2008
Kramer v. Petisi - SC17549 [Docket Summary - Property; Negligent Misrepresentation; Comparative Negligence; Whether the Doctrine of Comparative Negligence Applies to Cases Concerning the Negligent Misrepresentation of Property Boundary Lines.] 1/22/2008
Andross v. West Hartford - SC17742 [Land Use; Standing; Mootness; Whether Trial Court Properly Ruled that Town Residents Lacked Standing to Bring Action for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief; Whether This Appeal is Moot due to Occurrence of Subsequent Events, Including Transfer of Property to Third Party.] [docket summary] 1/14/2008
The following Connecticut Supreme Court opinion was released today:
- Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Inc. - SC17594 (Housing discrimination;
claim that landlords' refusal to rent to prospective tenant because she received housing assistance through 42 U.S.C. §1437f (section 8) was a violation of C.G.S. section 46a-64c; landlord, in deciding not to rent to a prospective tenant, may rely on the statutory exception only with respect to income requirements that bear a reasonable relationship to a prospective tenant’s ability to meet his or her personal rental obligations, as well as other obligations that arise from the tenancy; right to litigate fully the reasonableness of attorney's fees entitles the opposing party to question under oath a billing attorney who has submitted an affidavit in support of the requested fees, in order to challenge the reasonableness of those fees.)
The following Supreme Court Opinion was released today:
R.C. Equity Group, LLC v. Zoning Commission - SC17676 (Zoning appeal; motion to dismiss on basis of the plaintiff's failure to serve borough clerk as required by C.G.S. section 8-8(f)(2); whether marshal's conduct in failing to serve borough clerk constituted "default or neglect" within meaning of section 8-8(q) savings provision.) 12/24/2007Felician Sisters of St. Francis of Connecticut, Inc. v. Historic District Commission - SC17931 ("The principal issue in this appeal is whether a town’s historic district commission has jurisdiction over the parking lot of a private elementary school pursuant to General Statutes § 7-147d (d)." Hotshoe Enterprises, LLC v. Hartford - SC17885 ("The defendant, the city of Hartford, appeals from the judgment of the trial court sustaining the tax appeal, brought pursuant to General Statutes § 12-119, by the plaintiffs, fourteen owners of condominium hangar units at Brainard Airport.") 11/28/2007
ATC Partnership v. Coats North America Consolidated, Inc. - SC17806 ("The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly: (1) concluded that the plaintiff was not entitled to obtain reimbursement from the defendant pursuant to General Statutes § 22a-452 (a) because the plaintiff had not expended any funds for the remediation of the property; (2) concluded that the plaintiff could not prevail on a claim of common-law indemnification; and (3) declined to recognize a cause of action for equitable indemnification. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.") 11/13/2007
Corcoran v. Connecticut Siting Council - SC17808 (Administrative appeal; challenge to siting council's approval of application for certificate of environmental compatibility and public need for construction of wireless telecommunications tower; dismissal of administrative appeals by trial court; claim that trial court improperly concluded that statute (§ 16-50p [g]) did not limit siting council's discretion in cases wherein applicant had already acquired land for purpose of constructing telecommunications tower). 11/5/2007
Deutche Bank National Trust Co. v. Angle - SC17657
(Foreclosure; application for protection from foreclosure and for restructuring of debt pursuant to homeowner protection statute ( §49-31d et seq.); challenge to state agency regulation ( §49-31j-4) as exceeding statutory authority conferred on banking commissioner; inadequate record for review; purpose of motion for articulation, discussed.). |
|
|
|