Legal Opinion

Schroeter v. Salvati

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided April 1, 1986No. 3590PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The plaintiffs, Louis and Doris Schroeter, appeal from the trial court’s order1 dissolving their prejudgment attachment on the real estate *623of Polly Grogan, one of the defendants.2 The trial court dissolved the attachment based on its finding that the sheriff’s return to court did not, as required by General Statutes § 52-280,3 contain a description of the property attached. The plaintiffs claim that in so holding, the trial court erred. They also argue that the court erred by refusing to allow them to amend the sheriff’s return and by refusing to grant their motion for a stay of the order of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. VroomSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  2. Hall v. Dichello Distributors, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1986

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bradley's Appeal from ProbateConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
  2. Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of GrotonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
  3. Colonial Bank & Trust Co. v. MatoffConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
  4. Connecticut Savings Bank v. HowesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API