Legal Opinion
Rowe v. Goulet
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 28, 2005No. AC 24557PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BISHOP, J.
The defendant Kenneth Conrad1 appeals challenging the trial court’s denial of his motion to open the default that had been entered against him for failure to plead. Conrad claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his motion to open, (2) lacked personal jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to General Statutes § 51-183b and (3) improperly calculated the award of double damages. We reverse in part the judgment of the trial court as it pertains to the award of double damages.
The following facts and protracted procedural history are germane to our review of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Haynes v. Yale-New Haven HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Jonap v. SilverConnecticut Appellate Court · 1983
- Higgins v. KarpSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Franklin Credit Management Corp. v. NicholasConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Mack v. LaValleyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Chapman Lumber, Inc. v. TagerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Lawton v. WeinerConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Flater v. GraceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Taylor v. KingConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Meribear Prods., Inc. v. FrankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.