Fraga v. Fraga, No. Cv 98-0582555-S (Nov. 6, 2000)
This text of 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 13998 (Fraga v. Fraga, No. Cv 98-0582555-S (Nov. 6, 2000)) 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.
Opinion
In order to obtain the funds, the defendant applied and was approved for a bank mortgage. The parties are in agreement that the defendant did her best in good faith to obtain the mortgage. Due, however, to the bank's delays payment was not made to the plaintiff until 10 days after the due date. plaintiff now seeks to reject the funds and proceed to foreclosure on the defendant's property pursuant to the original note and mortgage. CT Page 13999
The defendant claims that the plaintiff, through his attorney, agreed to extend the payment date and waived the late payment.
Waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a known right. Majernicekv. Hartford Casualty Ins. Co.,
At the evidentiary hearing on this motion, the defendant offered testimony by Elizabeth Calderone, a paralegal in the defendant's attorneys' office representing her in obtaining the mortgage financing to pay the plaintiff.
Ms. Calderone's uncontroverted testimony was that on Monday, July 17, 2000, (the due date) she spoke with the plaintiff's Attorney Gwen Dreilinger, after leaving a voice mail message for her on Friday, July 14th. She advised Attorney Dreilinger that the earlier closing date could not be met and asked "is the deal off?" Dreilinger responded that she hadn't heard from the plaintiff and "if he's not worried, I'm not worried."
Ms. Calderone further advised Attorney Dreilinger that payment would probably be made by the end of the week, Attorney Dreilinger replied "that's fine."
The closing took place within the estimated time. Ms. Calderone offered to deliver the $10,000 to Dreilinger but was told to mail it on July 24, 2000.
Ms. Calderone further testified that if Attorney Dreilinger had told her on July 17th that it was too late for the payment she wouldn't have closed the loan.
Clearly those statements, which this court finds credible, constitute a waiver by the plaintiff's attorney to the defendant's attorneys binding the plaintiff. Shuster v. Buckley,
The court also finds that performance by the defendant was required to CT Page 14000 be reasonable under the circumstances. The defendant did perform (delivered payment) in a reasonable manner under the circumstances of this case. See Bradford Novelty Co. v. Technomatic, Inc.,
This court therefore finds that the defendant has complied with the terms of the stipulated judgment and therefore the plaintiff's motions to enforce the stipulated judgment and for strict foreclosure are denied.
Freed, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 13998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fraga-v-fraga-no-cv-98-0582555-s-nov-6-2000-connsuperct-2000.