Legal Opinion

Gelormino v. Blaustein

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided June 29, 1993No. 11690PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

The defendant appeals from the order of the trial court granting the plaintiffs application for a prejudgment attachment. The gravamen of the defendant’s claims on appeal is that the plaintiff’s action was barred by the statute of limitations pursuant to General Statutes § 52-577. We are unable to review this matter, however, because the record is inadequate.

This court recently noted that we cannot render a decision without first having “specific findings of fact to determine the basis of the court’s ruling.” State v. Rios, 30 Conn. App. 712, 715, 622 A.2d 618 (1993). “It is incumbent upon…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Walton v. Town of New HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
  2. State v. RiosConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Chase Manhattan Bank v. AECO Elevator Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1998
  2. Alix v. LeechConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
  3. Keiser v. Conservation CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
  4. Dime Savings Bank v. CornagliaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
  5. Statewide Grievance Committee v. ClarkeConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API