Legal Opinion

Ruggiero v. Ruggiero

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided June 2, 1978No. FILE NO. 640PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParskey, J.

The record reflects that after the pleadings were closed the court, on January 30,1976, permitted the defendant’s counsel to withdraw his appearance. Thereafter the defendant was not represented by counsel or pro se. On June 30, 1977, the case was reached for trial. The defendant was not present. There is no record that the defendant was notified by the court that his case was assigned for trial. Upon the plaintiffs’ oral motion, the court entered a default against the defendant for failure to appear and, after an immediate hearing in damages, rendered judgment for the plaintiffs. On August…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Kellems v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  2. Turner v. ScanlonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
  3. Lee v. LeeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
  4. Automotive Twins, Inc. v. KleinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
  5. Ferguson v. SaboSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In re Baby Girl B.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
  2. Hart, Nininger & Campbell Associates v. RogersConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
  3. Ero v. M & M Enterprises, Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1984
  4. Strong v. CollierConnecticut Superior Court · 1983
  5. Carberry v. Fleet, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1984

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

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

Powered by the Exa API