Legal Opinion

Connecticut National Bank v. L & R Realty

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided August 26, 1997No. AC 16092PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HEIMAN, J.

The defendants appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the plaintiff in this foreclosure action. On appeal, the defendants claim that the trial court improperly (1) found that there was sufficient evidence to support a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, (2) lacked jurisdiction to set law days after dismissal of the first appeal, (3) granted the plaintiffs motion to strike the counterclaims from the jury list, (4) awarded attorney’s fees, (5) held the plaintiff could enforce the note, and (6) held the subordination agreement was unenforceable.

This…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gaudio v. GaudioConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
  2. Northeast Savings, F.A. v. Plymouth Commons Realty Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  3. L & R Realty v. Connecticut National BankConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. L & R Realty v. Connecticut National BankConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
  2. L & R Realty v. Connecticut National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  3. Phoenix Leasing, Inc. v. KosinskiConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
  4. L & R Realty v. Connecticut National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  5. Gmac Mortgage Corporation v. Ferrante, No. Cv97 034 35 59 S (Oct. 3, 1997)Connecticut Superior Court · 1997

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