Legal Opinion
Sweet v. Sumnerbrook Mill Development Corp.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided April 10, 1990No. 5793, 5794PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Lavery,. J.
In these combined appeals, the plaintiff challenges the dissolution of two ex parte attachments of real estate.1 The plaintiff claims that the trial court erred (1) in reaching a determination on the merits of the issue of fraud, and (2) in determining that the evidence adduced at the hearing was insufficient to support probable cause as to the validity of the claim of fraudulent conveyance. We find no error.
The law governing prejudgment remedies is codified in General Statutes §§ 52-278a through 52-278n. An ex parte prejudgment remedy, such as that sought in this case, is…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Three S. Development Co. v. SantoreSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Town Bank & Trust Co. v. BensonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
- Ledgebrook Condominium Assn., Inc. v. Lusk CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Augeri v. C. F. Wooding Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Babiarz v. Hartford Special, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Corsino v. TelescaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. SheaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Village Linc Corp. v. Children's Store, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Bank of Boston Connecticut v. ChumnanvechConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Bello v. Nat'l Oil Recycling, No. Cvnh 9709-8401 (Oct. 7, 1997)Connecticut Superior Court · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.