Legal Opinion
Ursini v. Barnett
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided November 9, 2010No. AC 31458PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
2Per curiam
The defendant in this summary process action, James Barnett, 1 appeals from the trial court’s judgment of possession in favor of the plaintiff, Michael Ursini. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts and procedural history are relevant to the defendant’s appeal. The defendant owned a home located at 72 Nooks Hill Road in Cromwell. He was facing foreclosure by sale of the property, scheduled for June 28, 2008. To avoid foreclosure, he sold the property to the plaintiff. On June 5, 2008, the date of the closing, the parties entered into a one year written lease…
3Cases cited6 opinions
- Mayron's Bake Shops, Inc. v. Arrow Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Byers v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Journal Publishing Co. v. Hartford Courant Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Yarbrough v. DemirjianConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Bahjat v. DadiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by3 opinions
- J & E Investment Co. v. AthanConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- J. M. v. E. M.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2022
- Ursini v. BarnettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011