Legal Opinion

Twenty-Four Merrill Street Condominium Ass'n v. Murray

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided July 25, 2006No. AC 25688PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ROGERS, J.

In this action to foreclose a statutoiy lien, the defendant Michael W. Murray1 appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the plaintiff, Twenty-Four Merrill Street Condominium Association, Inc. The defendant claims that (1) the present action is barred under the doctrine of res judicata *618and (2) the court’s finding that the plaintiff complied with the notice requirement of its bylaws is clearly erroneous, thereby rendering the statutory lien invalid. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The relevant facts are as follows. On April 18, 2000, the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. Fink v. GolenbockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  3. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. MurphySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  4. Gionfriddo v. Gartenhaus CafeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
  5. Gionfriddo v. Gartenhaus CafeConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. In Re Soon KwonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
  2. CCT Communications, Inc. v. Zone Telecom, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
  3. Stein v. HortonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
  4. Aurora Loan Services, LLC v. CondronConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
  5. Michalski v. HinzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007

17 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