New Haven Sav. Bank v. LaPlace, 786 A.2d 426 (Conn. 2001). · Go Syfert
Search
New Haven Sav. Bank v. LaPlace, 786 A.2d 426 (Conn. 2001). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
115 citation events (115 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Smigelski v. Kosiorek (connappct, 2012-10-23)
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Smigelski v. Kosiorek
Conn. App. Ct. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Strobel v. Strobel, 64 Conn. App. 614, 620 , 781 A.2d 356 (concluding that defendant in dissolution of marriage proceeding did not have standing to disqualify counsel of minor child), cert. denied, 258 Conn. 937 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001).
cited Cited "see" State v. Osuch
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Honan v. Dimyan, 63 Conn. App. 702 , 706 n.10, 778 A.2d 989 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 430 (2001).
discussed Cited "see" JP Morgan Chase Bank v. Rodrigues (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See New Haven Savings Bank v. LaPlace, 66 Conn. App. 1, 9-11 , 783 A.2d 1174 (trial court properly rendered summary judgment against defendant on ground that counterclaim not related to making, validity or enforcement of mortgage note), cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001); see also Southbridge Associates, LLC v. Garofalo, supra, 53 Conn. App. 16 -17.
discussed Cited "see" Embalmers' Supply Co. v. Giannitti
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Honan v. Dimyan, 63 Conn. App. 702 , 778 A.2d 989 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 430 (2001); State v. Gracewski, 61 Conn. App. 726, 734 , 767 A.2d 173 (2001); State v. Harris, 28 Conn. App. 474, 476-77 , 612 A.2d 123 , cert. denied, 223 Conn. 926 , 614 A.2d 828 (1992); State v. Anthony, 24 Conn. App. 195, 210 , 588 A.2d 214 , cert. dismissed, 218 Conn. 911 , 591 A.2d 813 , cert. denied, 502 U.S. 913 , 112 S. Ct. 312 , 116 L.
cited Cited "see" Desimini v. Bristol Hospital, Inc.
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Musorofiti v. Vlcek, 65 Conn. App. 365, 375-76 , 783 A.2d 36 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 938 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001).
cited Cited "see" Prestige Management, LLC v. Auger
Conn. App. Ct. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ardito v. Olinger, 65 Conn. App. 295, 297 , 782 A.2d 698 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 429 (2001).
cited Cited "see" Florian v. Lenge
Conn. App. Ct. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See id.
cited Cited "see" Cousins v. Nelson
Conn. App. Ct. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Musorofiti v. Vleck, 65 Conn. App. 365, 385-87 , 783 A.2d 36 , cert, denied, 258 Conn. 938 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001).
cited Cited "see" Cardi Materials Corp. v. Connecticut Landscaping Bruzzi Corp.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ardito v. Olinger, 65 Conn. App. 295, 300 , 782 A.2d 698 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 429 (2001).
cited Cited "see" State v. Rivera
Conn. App. Ct. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Strobel v. Strobel, 64 Conn. App. 614, 623 , 781 A.2d 356 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 937 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001).
cited Cited "see" TDS Painting & Restoration, Inc. v. Copper Beech Farm, Inc.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Honan v. Dimyan, 63 Conn. App. 702 , 778 A.2d 989 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 430 (2001).
cited Cited "see" Strobel v. Strobel
Conn. App. Ct. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Strobel v. Strobel, 64 Conn. App. 614, 623 , 781 A.2d 356 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 937 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001).
discussed Cited "see" Homestead Funding Corp. v. Welch, No. 067260 (Aug. 28, 2002)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2002 · signal: accord · confidence high
"The making of the note and the . . . subsequent default is the transaction at issue." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Norwest Mortgage v. Clapper , Superior Court, judicial district of Windham at Putnam, Docket No. 060598 (January 4, 2002, Kocay, J .) "[A] counterclaim brought by a defendant in a foreclosure action . . . must address the making, validity or enforcement of the note and mortgage." Bankers Trust Co. v. Megos , Superior Court, judicial district of New London at New London, Docket No. 558890 (March 13, 2002, Martin, J .); accord, New Haven Savings Bank v. LaPlace , 66 Conn. Ap…
discussed Cited "see" Hammick v. Hammick (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Strobel v. Strobel, 64 Conn. App. 614, 623 , 781 A.2d 356 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 937 , 786 A.2d 426 (2001).
discussed Cited "see" Ocwen Federal Bank v. Rivas, No. Cv 99 0368135 S (Feb. 21, 2002)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2002 · signal: accord · confidence high
"A counterclaim brought by a defendant in a foreclosure action, like a special defense, must address the making, validity or enforcement of the note or mortgage." Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB v. Stawski, Superior Court, judicial district of New London at New London, Docket No. 552683 (April 26, 2000, Martin, J .); accord, New Haven Savings Bank v. LaPlace, 66 Conn. App. 1 , 9 , 783 A.2d 1174 , cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 (2001) (affirming the trial court's decision granting summary judgment against the defendant on the ground that his counterclaims were not related to the making, validity of enforc…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Sorrentino (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see also · confidence low
Section 10-10 of the Practice Book provides in relevant part that ‘‘[i]n any action for legal or equitable relief, any defendant may file counterclaims against any plaintiff . . . provided that each such counterclaim . . . arises out of the transaction or one of the transactions which is the subject of the plaintiff’s complaint . . . .’’ This court previously has held that, ‘‘[i]n a foreclosure action, a counterclaim must relate to the making, validity or enforcement of the mortgage note in order properly to be joined with the complaint.’’ JP Morgan Chase Bank, Trustee v. Rod…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." LaMacchia v. Chilinsky
Conn. App. Ct. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence low
“Res judicata or claim preclusion prevents a litigant from reasserting a claim that has already been decided on the merits.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Virgo v. Lyons, 209 Conn. 497, 501 , 551 A.2d 1243 (1988); see also Honan v. Dimyan, 63 Conn. App. 702, 708 , 778 A.2d 989 (res judicata may operate to preclude claim decided in previous proceeding within same case), cert. denied, 258 Conn. 942 , 786 A.2d 430 (2001).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." LLP Mortgage, Ltd. v. Fr, L.L.C., No. 558476 (Jan. 31, 2002)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
Further, based on the same rationale, the defenses . . . cannot attack some act or procedure of the lienholder. . . .' (Internal quotation marks omitted.) First Nationwide Mortgage Corp. v. Murphy , Superior Court, judicial district of New London, Docket No. 550981 (November 19, 1999, Martin, J. ); see also Southbridge Associates, LLC v. Garofalo , 53 Conn. App. 11 , 15-16 , 728 A.2d 1114 , cert. denied, 249 Conn. 919 , 733 A.2d 229 (1999) (Trial court properly granted the motion for summary judgment because the special defense did not attack the making, validity or enforcement of the notes an…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
NEW HAVEN SAVINGS BANK, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE
v.
SIMON R. LAPLACE
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Nov 14, 2001.
786 A.2d 426
William H. Clendenen, Jr., in support of the petition., John J. Resnik, in opposition.
Published

The defendants’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 66 Conn. App. 1 (AC 21388), is denied.

SULLIVAN, C. J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.