Bank of Boston Connecticut v. Maier, No. 0112839 (Jul. 28, 1994)

Connecticut Superior Court

Bank of Boston Connecticut v. Maier, No. 0112839 (Jul. 28, 1994)

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 7051

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedJuly 28, 1994

DocketNo. 0112839

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 7051 (Bank of Boston Connecticut v. Maier, No. 0112839 (Jul. 28, 1994)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of Boston Connecticut v. Maier, No. 0112839 (Jul. 28, 1994), 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 7051 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Pursuant to motion of the parties for an allowance of counsel fees and costs, the court finds that pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 52-251, the parties are entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys fees for defense of the above captioned action.

On behalf of the defendant Ronald P. Maier, the court has carefully reviewed the submitted bills and time charges therefor. The court finds that an amount of $27,415.63 is awarded the defendant as reasonable attorneys fees and costs. The court orders that $20,000 is to be reimbursed to the defendant from the principal of the trust and the balance of $7,415.63 be paid from income.

On behalf of the plaintiff Bank of Boston, the court has carefully reviewed the submitted bills and time charges for attorneys fees incurred. The court finds that an amount of $14,602.80 is awarded as fair and reasonable attorneys fees and expenses. The court orders in addition thereto, the sum of $1,000 as reasonable witness fees for expert testimony relative to the hearing on the allowance of fees. The sum of $11,000.00 is to be paid the plaintiff from the principal of the trust and the balance of $4,602.80 to be paid the plaintiff from the income to the trust. CT Page 7052

The court further orders that those sums allowed as attorneys fees, costs or expenses which sums the court has allowed to be paid from the principal of the trust involved herein, be paid to the respective petitioner forthwith. The court orders that no investment be liquidated for such payments if such liquidation would require a forfeiture of interest income.

/s/ Kocay, J. -------- KOCAY, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Pursuant to motion of the parties for an allowance of counsel fees and costs, the court finds that pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 52-251, the parties are entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys fees for defense of the above captioned action.

On behalf of the defendant Ronald P. Maier, the court has carefully reviewed the submitted bills and time charges therefor. The court finds that an amount of $27,415.63 is awarded the defendant as reasonable attorneys fees and costs. The court orders that $20,000 is to be reimbursed to the defendant from the principal of the trust and the balance of $7,415.63 be paid from income.

On behalf of the plaintiff Bank of Boston, the court has carefully reviewed the submitted bills and time charges for attorneys fees incurred. The court finds that an amount of $14,602.80 is awarded as fair and reasonable attorneys fees and expenses. The court orders in addition thereto, the sum of $1,000 as reasonable witness fees for expert testimony relative to the hearing on the allowance of fees. The sum of $11,000.00 is to be paid the plaintiff from the principal of the trust and the balance of $4,602.80 to be paid the plaintiff from the income to the trust. CT Page 7052

The court further orders that those sums allowed as attorneys fees, costs or expenses which sums the court has allowed to be paid from the principal of the trust involved herein, be paid to the respective petitioner forthwith. The court orders that no investment be liquidated for such payments if such liquidation would require a forfeiture of interest income.

/s/ Kocay, J. -------- KOCAY, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 7051, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-boston-connecticut-v-maier-no-0112839-jul-28-1994-connsuperct-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack