Central Bank v. Heggelund

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Central Bank v. Heggelund

584 A.2d 471, 217 Conn. 804, 1990 Conn. LEXIS 446

DecidedDecember 20, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 584 A.2d 471 (Central Bank v. Heggelund) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Central Bank v. Heggelund, 584 A.2d 471, 217 Conn. 804, 1990 Conn. LEXIS 446 (Colo. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

The named defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 23 Conn. App. 266, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Was the foreclosing plaintiff entitled to a deficiency judgment based upon the price it bid at the foreclosure sale when that price was substantially below the appraised value of the property as found by the trial court and the appraisers appointed by the court?

“2. Is the defendant, who contested the confirmation of the sale, barred from raising the issue of whether the sale should have been confirmed in his appeal from the deficiency judgment?

“3. Should the court have applied the equitable doctrine of appropriation in determining the amount of the deficiency judgment and used the fair market value of the property rather than its sale price in its calculation of the deficiency?”

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

The named defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 23 Conn. App. 266, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Was the foreclosing plaintiff entitled to a deficiency judgment based upon the price it bid at the foreclosure sale when that price was substantially below the appraised value of the property as found by the trial court and the appraisers appointed by the court?

“2. Is the defendant, who contested the confirmation of the sale, barred from raising the issue of whether the sale should have been confirmed in his appeal from the deficiency judgment?

“3. Should the court have applied the equitable doctrine of appropriation in determining the amount of the deficiency judgment and used the fair market value of the property rather than its sale price in its calculation of the deficiency?”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

584 A.2d 471, 217 Conn. 804, 1990 Conn. LEXIS 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/central-bank-v-heggelund-conn-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack