Federal Deposit Insurance v. Bombero
Connecticut Appellate Court
1DissentDupont, C. J.
I respectfully dissent.
General Statutes § 49-30 provides that the “omission ... to properly foreclose . . . may be completely cured and cleared by deed or foreclosure or other proper legal proceedings to which the only necessary parties shall be the party acquiring such foreclosure title, or his successor in title, and the party . . . thus not foreclosed . . . .” (Emphasis added.) The intent of the statute, to cure and to provide a remedy for the omission of a party from foreclosure proceedings, is apparent from its language. The type of cure is also apparent. The cure can consist of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- First Bank v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Hartford Federal Savings & Loan Assn. v. LenczykSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
- Loomis v. KnoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1891
- Milici v. FerraraSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1946