Investor's Mortgage & Guarantee Co. v. De Gaemo

2 Conn. Supp. 63, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 203
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Investor's Mortgage & Guarantee Co. v. De Gaemo. Read the opinion of the Court — 2 Conn. Super. Ct. 63
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided June 25, 1935·No. File #47721·Published

Opinion

CORNELL, J.

Among the other pre-requisites prescribed for the entering of a Summary Judgment is that the affidavit contain a statement to the effect that the affiant believe there is no defense to the action. Practice Book, #53.

There is not such a statement in the affidavit accompanying the motion in this instance.

Under the circumstances here, would not a judgment by default be in order? See Practice Books #47 and #187.

The instant motion is denied for the reason stated, supra.

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

Investor's Mortgage & Guarantee Co. v. De Gaemo, 2 Conn. Supp. 63, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 203 (Colo. Ct. App. 1935).

2 Conn. Supp. 63 (Investor's Mortgage & Guarantee Co. v. De Gaemo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.