Legal Opinion

Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. Porto

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided June 4, 1996No. 15179PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLavery, J.

In this action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant, George Porto,1 appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly concluded that the plaintiff had no duty to give notice of acceleration to the defendant prior to accelerating the debt. Although we agree with the defendant that the plaintiff had a duty to give notice of acceleration, we conclude that the plaintiff has complied with the notice requirements of the mortgage deed. We, therefore, affirm the judgment of the trial…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Connell v. ColwellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  2. Burns v. Hartford HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  3. Batick v. SeymourSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  4. Strada v. Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  5. D.H.R. Construction Co. v. DonnellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Webster Bank v. OakleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
  2. New Haven Savings Bank v. LaPlaceConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  3. Maffucci v. Royal Park Ltd. PartnershipConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
  4. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. GodutoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
  5. Northeast Savings, F.A. v. ScherbanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API