Legal Opinion
Moore v. Brancard
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided May 17, 2005No. AC 25013PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DiPENTIMA, J.
This appeal centers on the requirements of General Statutes § 52-212, which governs the opening of judgments after default or nonsuit. The plaintiff, Elizabeth Moore, claims that the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion to open the judgment that dismissed her action against the defendant, Donald W. Brancard, Jr. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
By complaint dated October 9,2000, the plaintiff commenced an action alleging, inter alia, breach of contract by the defendant. Following the filing of three revised complaints, a pretrial conference was…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gillis v. GillisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Steve Viglione Sheet Metal Co. v. SakonchickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Pantlin & Chananie Development Corp. v. Hartford Cement & Building Supply Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Jaconski v. AMF, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Bauer v. PoundsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Lawton v. WeinerConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Langewisch v. New England Residential Services, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Eremita v. MorelloConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- Bozelko v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020
- Ertel v. DemmonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.