Hobby v. Feldman

482 A.2d 1226, 2 Conn. App. 696, 1984 Conn. App. LEXIS 710
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided November 13, 1984·No. 2268·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiffs, by their complaint, sought a judgment declaring invalid the mortgage held by the defendants on the real property of the plaintiffs. The defendants, by their counterclaim, sought damages from the plaintiffs for failure to pay amounts due under an agreement. The agreement created the obligation for which the mortgage held by the defendants was security. The trial court issued a factually detailed memorandum of decision and rendered judgment for the defendants on the complaint and on the counterclaim. We have carefully considered the claims of error of the [697]*697plaintiffs on appeal1 and find them to be without merit. They amount to an attempt to persuade us to retry the facts found by the trial court, which are amply supported by the evidence and are not clearly erroneous.

There is no error.

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

Hobby v. Feldman, 482 A.2d 1226, 2 Conn. App. 696, 1984 Conn. App. LEXIS 710 (Colo. Ct. App. 1984).

482 A.2d 1226 (Hobby v. Feldman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

MacArthur/Nathan Associates v. Edson Realty, Inc.
491 A.2d 1111 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)
Shetucket Plumbing Supply, Inc. v. Solar Processes, Inc.
490 A.2d 93 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)
Halepas v. Malerba
488 A.2d 847 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)
Leabo v. Leninski
484 A.2d 239 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1984)