Legal Opinion
Milazzo v. Schwartz
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided March 11, 1997No. 15579PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.
The plaintiff, Samuel Milazzo, sought judgment of strict foreclosure of two mortgages that he held on property of the defendants, Barry Schwartz and Creative Food and Beverage, Inc. On appeal, the defendants claim that the trial court improperly (1) concluded that the parties’ oral agreement violated the statute of frauds, (2) concluded that the defendants were estopped from pursuing their special defenses and counterclaims against the plaintiff as a result of a previously entered stipulation, and (3) awarded interest to the plaintiff. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The plaintiff…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ubysz v. DiPietroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Union Trust Co. v. JacksonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Harmonie Club, Inc. v. SmirnowSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Patron v. KonoverConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- Fleet Bank, N.A. v. GalluzzoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Konover v. Town of West HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Willow Funding Co., L.P. v. Grencom AssociatesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- National Amusements, Inc. v. Town of East WindsorConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- Battalino v. Van PattenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Milazzo v. SchwartzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.