part performance doctrine (Connecticut) · Go Syfert
← Connecticut issues

part performance doctrine in Connecticut

20 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1981–2014 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Ubysz v. DiPietrogreen
conn · 1981 · cited in 4 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1994–2001
2 sentences

1996One of these exceptions is the doctrine of part performance; see Ubysz v. DiPietro, 185 Conn. 47 , 54 ; another is when an oral promise is made in open court.

1994The defendants, having failed to comply with the statute of frauds, are "relying on a theory of part performance, under which `acts on the part of [a] promisee may be sufficient to take a contract out of the statute' of frauds." [ Dunham v. Dunham, ] 204 Conn. 303 , 314 , 528 A.2d 1123 (1987), quoting [ Ubysz v. DiPietro, ] 185 Conn. 47 , 54 , 440 A.2d 830 (1981). "`The doctrine of part performance arose from the necessity of preventing the statute against frauds from becoming an engine of fraud.'" (Citation omitted.) [ Ubysz v. DiPietro, ] supra. "The doctrine of part performance requires, ho

14
Breen v. Phelpsgreen
conn · 1982 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1987–2014
2 sentences

2014The issue for our Supreme Court was ‘‘whether the facts provable within the framework of the complaint, giving its allegations a construction as favorable to the plaintiff as reasonable, would bring his case within [the] principles [of the part performance doctrine].’’ Id., 94 .

1991Our Supreme Court has stated: "Furthermore, even assuming that the trial court had determined that the parties had an agreement, the plaintiff could not prevail because the court also found that the acts undertaken by the plaintiff prior to the initiation of this action were not sufficiently substantial to satisfy the part performance exception to the statutes of frauds." See Breen v. Phelps, 186 Conn. 86 , 95 , 439 A.2d 1066 (1982)." Dunham v. Dunham, 204 Conn. 303 , 315 , 528 A.2d 1123 (1987).

13
Harley v. Indian Spring Land Co.green
connappct · 2010 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See Glazer v. Dress Barn, Inc., supra, 274 Conn. 65–72; Blackwell v. Mahmood, supra, 120 Conn. App. 695–99; see also Harley v. Indian Spring Land Co., 123 Conn. App. 800 , 829–30, 3 A.3d 992 (2010); cf. H.

2014See Glazer v. Dress Barn, Inc., supra, 274 Conn. 65–72; Blackwell v. Mahmood, supra, 120 Conn. App. 695–99; see also Harley v. Indian Spring Land Co., 123 Conn. App. 800 , 829–30, 3 A.3d 992 (2010); cf. H.

11
Siladi v. McNamaragreen
conn · 1973 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981
2 sentences

1981IY The defendant further attacks the jury charge on the ground that the court’s instruction concerning the doctrine of part performance was not “accurate in law, adapted to the issues, and adequate to guide the jury in rendering a correct verdict.” 5 Berniere v. Kripps, 157 Conn. 356, 358 , 254 A.2d *60 496 (1969); see Siladi v. McNamara, 164 Conn. 510, 515 , 325 A.2d 277 (1973).

1981IY The defendant further attacks the jury charge on the ground that the court’s instruction concerning the doctrine of part performance was not “accurate in law, adapted to the issues, and adequate to guide the jury in rendering a correct verdict.” 5 Berniere v. Kripps, 157 Conn. 356, 358 , 254 A.2d *60 496 (1969); see Siladi v. McNamara, 164 Conn. 510, 515 , 325 A.2d 277 (1973).

11
Padula v. Padulagreen
conn · 1951 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981
2 sentences

1981On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred because “the doctrine of part performance does not apply in a situation where a claim is being made against an estate for an oral promise to devise land.” We have held that acts on 'the part of the promisee may be sufficient to take a contract out of the statute “if they are such as clearly refer to some contract in relation to the matter in dispute.” Rienzo v. Cohen, 112 Conn. 427, 429 , 152 A. 394 (1930); see Padula v. Padula, 138 Conn. 102, 108 , 82 A.2d 362 (1951).

1981On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred because “the doctrine of part performance does not apply in a situation where a claim is being made against an estate for an oral promise to devise land.” We have held that acts on 'the part of the promisee may be sufficient to take a contract out of the statute “if they are such as clearly refer to some contract in relation to the matter in dispute.” Rienzo v. Cohen, 112 Conn. 427, 429 , 152 A. 394 (1930); see Padula v. Padula, 138 Conn. 102, 108 , 82 A.2d 362 (1951).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (13)

CaseCitedYears
Dunham v. Dunham green
conn · 1987
2 sentences

1997According to Dunham v Dunham, 204 Conn. 303 , 528 A.2d 1123 (1987), for the doctrine of part performance to apply, it must first be found that there was an "agreement" between the parties.

1997According to Dunham v Dunham, 204 Conn. 303 , 528 A.2d 1123 (1987), for the doctrine of part performance to apply, it must first be found that there was an "agreement" between the parties.

81991–1997
Harmonie Club, Inc. v. Smirnow green
conn · 1927
2 sentences

1999"The doctrine of part performance arose from the necessity of preventing the statute against frauds from becoming an engine of fraud." Harmonie Club, Inc. v. Smirnow , 106 Conn. 243 , 249 , 137 A. 769 .

1991It does not, however, bar the conveyance of real estate pursuant to a contract that is not in writing." For example, "The doctrine of part performance [which removes an oral agreement from the Statute of Frauds] arose from the necessity of preventing the statute against fraud from becoming an engine of fraud." Rutt v. Roche, 138 Conn. 605 , 608 , 87 A.2d 805 (1952) citing Harmonic Club, Inc. v. Roche, 106 Conn. 243 , 137 A.2d 769 (1927).

41981–1999
Montanaro Bros. Builders, Inc. v. Snow green
conn · 1983
2 sentences

2010Builders, Inc. v. Snow, 190 Conn. 481, 485 , 460 A.2d 1297 (1983) (option agreements relating to interests in real property fall within statute of frauds). 22 “In the context of the statute of frauds . . . [our courts] sometimes have referred to the application of estoppel as the doctrine of part performance . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Glazer v. Dress Barn, Inc., supra, 274 Conn. 62 .

2010Builders, Inc. v. Snow, 190 Conn. 481, 485 , 460 A.2d 1297 (1983) (option agreements relating to interests in real property fall within statute of frauds). 22 “In the context of the statute of frauds . . . [our courts] sometimes have referred to the application of estoppel as the doctrine of part performance . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Glazer v. Dress Barn, Inc., supra, 274 Conn. 62 .

22001–2010
Rutt v. Roche green
conn · 1952
2 sentences

2005In the context of the statute of frauds, therefore, we sometimes have referred to the application of estoppel as the “doctrine of part performance . . . .1, 24 See, e.g., Rutt v. Roche, 138 Conn. 605, 608 , 87 A.2d 805 (1952); Galvin v. Simons, supra, 619 .

2005In the context of the statute of frauds, therefore, we sometimes have referred to the application of estoppel as the “doctrine of part performance . . . .1, 24 See, e.g., Rutt v. Roche, 138 Conn. 605, 608 , 87 A.2d 805 (1952); Galvin v. Simons, supra, 619 .

21991–2005
Andrew v. Babcock green
conn · 1893
2 sentences

1993Harmonie Club, Inc. v. Smirnow, 106 Conn. 243 , 249 , 137 A. 769 (1927). [T]he acts of part performance generally "must be such as are done by the party seeking to enforce the contract, and with the design of carrying the same into execution, and must also be done with the assent, express or implied, or knowledge of the other party, and be such acts as alter the relations of the parties." Andrew v. Babcock, 63 Conn. 109 , 120 , 26 A. 715 (1893).

1993Harmonie Club, Inc. v. Smirnow, 106 Conn. 243 , 249 , 137 A. 769 (1927). [T]he acts of part performance generally "must be such as are done by the party seeking to enforce the contract, and with the design of carrying the same into execution, and must also be done with the assent, express or implied, or knowledge of the other party, and be such acts as alter the relations of the parties." Andrew v. Babcock, 63 Conn. 109 , 120 , 26 A. 715 (1893).

21981–1993
Milazzo v. Schwartz green
conn · 1997
1 sentence

2014Milazzo v. Schwartz, 44 Conn. App. 402, 406 , 690 A.2d 401 , cert. denied, 240 Conn. 926 , 692 A.2d 1282 (1997).

12014–2014
Purzycki v. Town of Fairfield green
conn · 1997
1 sentence

2014Milazzo v. Schwartz, 44 Conn. App. 402, 406 , 690 A.2d 401 , cert. denied, 240 Conn. 926 , 692 A.2d 1282 (1997).

12014–2014
Milazzo v. Schwartz green
connappct · 1997
2 sentences

2014Milazzo v. Schwartz, 44 Conn. App. 402, 406 , 690 A.2d 401 , cert. denied, 240 Conn. 926 , 692 A.2d 1282 (1997).

2014Milazzo v. Schwartz, 44 Conn. App. 402, 406 , 690 A.2d 401 , cert. denied, 240 Conn. 926 , 692 A.2d 1282 (1997).

12014–2014
O'Sullivan v. Bergenty green
conn · 1990
1 sentence

2005Id., 647 .

12005–2005
Santoro v. Mack green
conn · 1929
1 sentence

1995Payment of property taxes, Breen v. Phelps , p. 94 , and measuring the land, making maps and surveys and plans for improvements prior to the acquisition of the title, Santoro v. Mack , 108 Conn. 683 , 692 , have also been found not to satisfy the part performance test.

11995–1995
Andrews v. New Britain National Bank green
conn · 1931
2 sentences

1987The doctrine of part performance requires, however, as an essential element, conduct that is “referable to and consistent with [an] oral agreement [between the parties].” Andrews v. New Britain National Bank, 113 Conn. 467, 474 , 155 A. 838 (1931); Montanaro Bros.

1987The doctrine of part performance requires, however, as an essential element, conduct that is “referable to and consistent with [an] oral agreement [between the parties].” Andrews v. New Britain National Bank, 113 Conn. 467, 474 , 155 A. 838 (1931); Montanaro Bros.

11987–1987
Rienzo v. Cohen green
conn · 1930
2 sentences

1981On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred because “the doctrine of part performance does not apply in a situation where a claim is being made against an estate for an oral promise to devise land.” We have held that acts on 'the part of the promisee may be sufficient to take a contract out of the statute “if they are such as clearly refer to some contract in relation to the matter in dispute.” Rienzo v. Cohen, 112 Conn. 427, 429 , 152 A. 394 (1930); see Padula v. Padula, 138 Conn. 102, 108 , 82 A.2d 362 (1951).

1981On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred because “the doctrine of part performance does not apply in a situation where a claim is being made against an estate for an oral promise to devise land.” We have held that acts on 'the part of the promisee may be sufficient to take a contract out of the statute “if they are such as clearly refer to some contract in relation to the matter in dispute.” Rienzo v. Cohen, 112 Conn. 427, 429 , 152 A. 394 (1930); see Padula v. Padula, 138 Conn. 102, 108 , 82 A.2d 362 (1951).

11981–1981
Berniere v. Kripps green
conn · 1969
1 sentence

1981IY The defendant further attacks the jury charge on the ground that the court’s instruction concerning the doctrine of part performance was not “accurate in law, adapted to the issues, and adequate to guide the jury in rendering a correct verdict.” 5 Berniere v. Kripps, 157 Conn. 356, 358 , 254 A.2d *60 496 (1969); see Siladi v. McNamara, 164 Conn. 510, 515 , 325 A.2d 277 (1973).

11981–1981

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-550 (5) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110a (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

NY 55 (1951–2025) WA 23 (1925–2022) CT 20 (1981–2014) OH 19 (1981–2025) AL 18 (1942–2011) ID 17 (1982–2023) IN 16 (1892–2025) UT 13 (1977–2022) ME 12 (2004–2020) MO 11 (1891–2025) AZ 11 (1977–2025) FL 9 (1974–2024) MI 9 (1917–2023) MD 9 (1939–1998) IL 8 (1986–2025) CA 8 (1930–2024) ND 7 (1903–2021) CO 7 (1983–2005) MN 6 (1909–2016) SC 6 (1984–2022) PA 6 (1982–2026) TN 6 (1983–2011) OR 6 (1975–2008) WI 5 (1945–2024) RI 5 (1991–2011) TX 5 (1967–2015) IA 5 (1939–2014) NC 5 (1920–2010) WY 4 (1993–2012) VA 4 (1851–2005) MT 3 (1926–2017) SD 3 (1912–2018) NJ 3 (1986–2013) DC 3 (1984–1998) NH 3 (2008–2017) DE 3 (1975–2019) VT 3 (1986–2015) GA 2 (2019–2022) KS 2 (1930–2018) KY 2 (1935–1947) NV 2 (1985–2018) NM 2 (2010–2021) VI 2 (1977–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check