Legal Opinion
Collard and Roe, PC v. Klein
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided February 8, 2005No. AC 24651PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DiPENTIMA, J.
The defendant Arthur O. Klein appeals from the judgments of the trial court rendered in a fraudulent conveyance action and an interpleader action. In the fraudulent conveyance action, the court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Collard & Roe, P.C. (Collard & Roe), a New York law firm, on both the complaint and the counterclaim. In the interpleader action, the court ordered the disbursement of escrowed funds and discharged the plaintiff escrow agents, Charles D. Rockwell and Michael A. Laux, from liability. Arthur Klein raises a number of issues on appeal…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Gaudio v. GaudioConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- State v. MorganConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Blumenthal v. Kimber Manufacturing, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Sweeney v. SweeneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Gilbert v. Beaver Dam Ass'n of Stratford, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2004
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lawton v. WeinerConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Perry v. StateConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Alexander v. AlexanderSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2016
- Ackerly and Brown, LLP v. SmithiesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- Gleason v. DurdenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2022
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.