Buford v. Briarwood Condominium Assoc., No. Cv96 033 05 17 S (Aug. 19, 1996)

Connecticut Superior Court

Buford v. Briarwood Condominium Assoc., No. Cv96 033 05 17 S (Aug. 19, 1996)

1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5284-LL

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedAugust 19, 1996

DocketNo. CV96 033 05 17 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5284-LL (Buford v. Briarwood Condominium Assoc., No. Cv96 033 05 17 S (Aug. 19, 1996)) 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

Buford v. Briarwood Condominium Assoc., No. Cv96 033 05 17 S (Aug. 19, 1996), 1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5284-LL (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE:PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (NO. 103) The court finds that the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (docket entry no. 103) should be denied as genuine issues of material fact remain regarding the defendant's special defense of laches and whether the entire amount of the six month priority lien has been paid by the plaintiff. Additionally, it should be noted that the attorneys for both parties submitted improper affidavits. 2830 Whitney Avenue v. Heritage Canal DevelopmentAssociates, Inc., 33 Conn. App. 563, 567-68, 636 A.2d 1377 (1994), citing Farrell v. Farrell, 182 Conn. 34, 37 n. 2, 438 A.2d 415 (1980). Nevertheless the genuine issues of material fact remain despite the procedural improprieties.

Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied. CT Page 5284-MM

WEST, 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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE:PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (NO. 103) The court finds that the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (docket entry no. 103) should be denied as genuine issues of material fact remain regarding the defendant's special defense of laches and whether the entire amount of the six month priority lien has been paid by the plaintiff. Additionally, it should be noted that the attorneys for both parties submitted improper affidavits. 2830 Whitney Avenue v. Heritage Canal DevelopmentAssociates, Inc., 33 Conn. App. 563, 567-68, 636 A.2d 1377 (1994), citing Farrell v. Farrell, 182 Conn. 34, 37 n. 2, 438 A.2d 415 (1980). Nevertheless the genuine issues of material fact remain despite the procedural improprieties.

Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied. CT Page 5284-MM

WEST, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5284-LL, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buford-v-briarwood-condominium-assoc-no-cv96-033-05-17-s-aug-19-connsuperct-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack