Legal Opinion

Barasso v. Rear Still Hill Road, LLC

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided March 9, 2004No. AC 23632PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

McLACHLAN, J.

The defendants in this foreclosure action, Rear- Still Hill Road, LLC, and Emerald Realty, *800Inc. (Emerald), appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the plaintiff, Anthony Barasso. The defendants claim that the court (1) improperly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and (2) failed to appoint a disinterested appraiser for the foreclosure sale. We agree with the defendants’ first claim and, therefore, reverse the judgment of the trial court.1

The relevant facts are as follows. The plaintiff holds a note, now in default, dated November 7,…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Mingachos v. CBS, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  2. United Oil Co. v. Urban Redevelopment CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
  3. Hammer v. Lumberman's Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  4. Miller v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  5. Wadia Enterprises, Inc. v. HirschfeldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hill v. Cross Country Settlement, LLCCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  2. Vollemans v. Town of WallingfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
  3. Monetary Funding Group, Inc. v. PluchinoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
  4. Weiner v. ClintonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
  5. Himmelstein v. Town of WindsorConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009

24 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