Legal Opinion
McLaughlin v. Smoron
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided March 20, 2001No. AC 19651PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HENNESSY, J.
The defendants, Stanley Smoron and Josephine Smoron,1 appeal following the trial court’s denial of their motion to open a default judgment. They claim that the court improperly found that (1) a final judgment had been rendered in favor of the plaintiff, Jay McLaughlin, (2) there was no reasonable cause to allow the judgment to be opened as to the defendant Stanley Smoron and (3) there was no reasonable cause to allow the judgment to be opened as to the defendant *369Josephine Smoron. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The court reasonably could have found the following…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- DiSimone v. VitelloConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986
- Kirwan v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Fontaine v. ThomasConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Twichell v. GuiteConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
- Cholewinski v. ConwayConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
3Cited by4 opinions
- Opoku v. GrantConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- Baris v. Southbend, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Teal v. Smiley, No. Fa 97-0624195s (Dec. 29, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002
- Wells Fargo Bank v. McKoy, No. Cv 02 0188087 (Dec. 3, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002