Legal Opinion

MacCio v. Hundley

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided December 12, 1980No. File No. 980Published

1Opinion of the Court

We have previously ordered a dismissal of the appeal which was taken from the judgment of possession rendered in favor of the plaintiff lessors in this case, because it was filed after the expiration of the five days allowed for an appeal by the summary process statute. General Statutes 47a-35; Maccio v. Hundley, 36 Conn. Sup. 623,422 A.2d 953 (1980). At the same time, we refused to dismiss the defendant's appeal from the denial of his motion to open the judgment, which we held was not governed by the time limit set forth in 47a-35 but by the limit established by Practice Book, 1978, 3007 for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Manchester State Bank v. RealeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
  2. Jacobson v. RobingtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
  3. Bellonio v. v. R. Thomas Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
  4. MacCio v. HundleyConnecticut Superior Court · 1980
  5. ADC Contracting & Supply Corporation v. Thomas J. Riordan, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API