Legal Opinion

Kleinman v. Chapnick

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided January 29, 2013No. AC 34614PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

- Opinion

2Per curiam

The plaintiff, Bernard V. Kleinman,1 appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing his complaint alleging a cause of action for conversion against the defendant, Ann M. Chapnick. On appeal, the *502plaintiff argues that the court improperly dismissed his complaint pursuant to the prior pending action doctrine. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The following facts and procedural history are relevant to the resolution of the plaintiffs appeal. The parties were married in 1979, and, on March 12, 2010, the court, Malone, J., rendered a judgment dissolving the marriage.…

3Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Halpern v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  2. Beaudoin v. Town Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  3. Label Systems Corp. v. Samad AghamohammadiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
  4. Bayer v. Showmotion, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
  5. Modzelewski v. William Raveis Real Estate, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2001

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

4Cited by5 opinions

  1. MacDermid, Inc. v. Cookson Group, PLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2014
  2. Ferrara v. Ryen Munro & Tripping Gnome Farm, LLCDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2018
  3. Luongo Construction & Development, LLC v. MacFarlaneConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
  4. A1Z7, LLC v. DombekConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019
  5. Luongo Construction & Development, LLC v. MacFarlaneConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API