Legal Opinion
Heussner v. Day, Berry and Howard, LLP
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided March 28, 2006No. AC 26461PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McLACHLAN, J.
The plaintiff, Janet Heussner, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after it granted the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants Day, Berry & Howard, LLP, and Greg oiy A. Hayes. The plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that the doctrine of collateral estoppel applied to preclude the relitigation of facts and issues that previously were determined in a Probate Court proceeding. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The facts are essentially undisputed. The plaintiff, a resident of New York, is the daughter of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- DeLaurentis v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- McHale v. W.B.S. Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Zenik v. O'BRIENSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- Gaynor v. PayneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Alexandru v. StrongConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Grasso v. Connecticut Hospice, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2012
- Byrne v. BurkeConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Justin F. v. MaloneyDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2007
- Martinez v. Southington Metal Fabricating Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Cannizzaro v. MarinyakConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.