Legal Opinion
Connecticut National Bank v. Rehab Associates
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 8, 2011No. SC 18597; SC 18598PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EVELEIGH, J.
These appeals arise from a foreclosure action and subsequent deficiency judgment against the defendants, Steven D. Hallahan and Richard Ermler, and their general partnership, Rehab Associates (Rehab), relating to a mortgage loan to Rehab that had *316been guaranteed by Hallahan and Ermler. The defendants1 now appeal2 from the judgment of the trial court denying Hallahan’s motion to determine that the deficiency judgment was fully or, alternatively, partially satisfied as a result of a settlement agreement (agreement) between Ermler and Shawmut Bank Connecticut, N.A. (Shawmut),…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United Illuminating Co. v. Wisvest-Connecticut, LLCSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Remillard v. RemillardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Afkari-Ahmadi v. Fotovat-AhmadiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Isham v. IshamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- 19 Perry Street, LLC v. Unionville Water Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
3Cited by14 opinions
- Western Dermatology Consultants, P.C. v. VitalWorks, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Censor v. ASC Technologies of Connecticut, LLCDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2012
- Lucien v. McCormick Construction, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. DegennaroConnecticut Appellate Court · 2014
- Raczkowski v. McFarlaneConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.