Legal Opinion
Suffield Bank v. Berman
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided July 30, 1991No. 9731; 9732PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
The defendants appeal from judgments of strict foreclosure in two cases.1 The parties agree that the cases are identical and we will discuss them in the singular for clarity. The defendants claim that the trial court improperly (1) prevented them from contesting the amount of the mortgage debt and (2) refused to admit the full transcript of a prior hearing into evidence. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.
The following facts are pertinent to our decision. Two of the defendants were owners of the equity of redemption in the property and the remaining defendants were *371obligated on the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Burritt Mutual Savings Bank of New Britain v. TuckerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Connecticut National Bank v. N. E. Owen II, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- Braun v. EdelsteinConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
3Cited by16 opinions
- Bank of America, FSB v. FrancoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
- Dime Savings Bank v. CornagliaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- Suffield Bank v. BermanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Curry v. BurnsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Bank of America, N.A. v. ChainaniConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.