Legal Opinion
Priest v. Edmonds
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 16, 2010No. SC 18407PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
VERTEFEUILLE, J.
The defendant, Kevin W. Edmonds, individually and doing business as Prescott Builders, 1 appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to open a default judgment and for a directed verdict. He claims that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion. The plaintiffs, William Priest and Christine Vannie, respond that the trial court properly exercised its discretion by denying the defendant’s motion to open. We conclude that the record is inadequate for our review and, therefore, we decline to review the merits of the defendant’s claim. 2
The following…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Chapman Lumber, Inc. v. TagerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Steve Viglione Sheet Metal Co. v. SakonchickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- TLC Development, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Stone-Krete Construction, Inc. v. EderSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Ravetto v. Triton Thalassic Technologies, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Jackson v. Unocal Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2011
- Nutmeg Housing Development Corp. v. ColchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2016
- Acadia Insurance v. O'ReillyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
- Caciopoli v. HowellConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Stones Trail, LLC v. Town of WestonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.