Legal Opinion
Pelarinos v. Henderson
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 21, 1994No. 12218PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLavery, J.
The sole issue in this appeal from a suit to enforce two promissory notes is whether the trial *727court properly excluded the deposition testimony of the defendant Donald Henderson, husband of the defendant Genevieve Henderson. The defendants assert that the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to admit the deposition pursuant to Practice Book § 248 (1) (d). We agree.
The defendants purchased commercial property from the plaintiff, Gus Pelarinos, in 1988. The defendants executed two promissory notes in favor of the plaintiff totaling $230,000. In addition to the defendants’ personal…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Secondino v. New Haven Gas Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Swenson v. SawoskaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Souper Spud, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- Cahn v. CahnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Souper Spud, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Black v. Goodwin, Loomis & Britton, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Mack v. LaValleyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
- SFP Tisca v. Robin Hill Farm, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Peter Rock Associates v. Town of North HavenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
- Park City Amusements v. Frog Pond, Inc., No. Cv94 0310493s (Feb. 16, 1995)Connecticut Superior Court · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.