Infante v. Porath
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
The defendant appeals from the judgment of the trial court in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant claims that the trial court improperly concluded that her motion to reopen1 was untimely, thereby precluding the court’s jurisdiction to hear the matter. We agree.
The plaintiff brought an action on a promissory note against the defendant, Michelle Porath. The defendant did not appear, and the trial court granted the plaintiff’s motion for default for failure to appear. In April, 1991, the plaintiff filed a motion for judgment, and judgment was rendered on April 29, 1991. On August 29,1991, the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lamberti v. City of StamfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- State v. GenottiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Nichols v. WarrenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Krajniak v. WilsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
3Cited by10 opinions
- Drahan v. Board of EducationConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Commissioner of Transportation v. KahnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- State v. CharltonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- State v. BrownConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Rochester v. PellechiaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.