Legal Opinion

Simonelli v. Fitzgerald

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 16, 1968PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThim, J.

The present action was instituted in 1965. The plaintiffs, husband and wife, as record owners of the property in question, sought, pursuant to General Statutes § 49-13, a declaration that two unpaid mortgages of record were invalid. Section 49-13 reads, in part, as follows: “When the record title to real property is encumbered by any undischarged mortgage, and the mortgagor or those owning his interest therein have been in undisturbed possession of such property for at least seventeen years . . . , the mortgagor or the person . . . owning his interest in such property may bring a petition to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Arnold v. HollisterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  2. Lewis v. CrowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  3. Mitchell v. BickfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
  4. McMahan v. McMahanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City of Bridgeport v. DebekSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
  2. Ghent v. Meadowhaven Condominium, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2003
  3. Gordon v. TufanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  4. Gordon v. TufanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  5. Gordon v. TufanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982

1 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