Lewin & Sons, Inc. v. Framularo

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Lewin & Sons, Inc. v. Framularo

270 A.2d 543, 159 Conn. 611

DecidedMay 26, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.2d 543 (Lewin & Sons, Inc. v. Framularo) 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

Lewin & Sons, Inc. v. Framularo, 270 A.2d 543, 159 Conn. 611 (Colo. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this case the court concluded that the mortgage sought to be foreclosed was invalid and not properly authorized by the corporation purporting to be the mortgagor. The plaintiff has not assigned error in the court’s conclusion, nor does its assignment of errors raise any other issue of law which may be reviewed by this court. The lack of such an assignment of error is fatal to the plaintiff’s appeal. Practice Book § 652; Charlton Press, Inc. v. Sullivan, 153 Conn. 103, 113, 214 A.2d 354; Maltbie, Conn. App. Proc. § 167. The claims of error which the plaintiff does raise are addressed to findings of fact made by the court and are necessarily irrelevant since there are no issues of law properly before us. See Practice Book §§ 622, 628; Martin v. Kavanewsky, 157 Conn. 514, 516, 255 A.2d 619; Maltbie, op. cit. § 157.

There is no error.

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

Per Curiam.

In this case the court concluded that the mortgage sought to be foreclosed was invalid and not properly authorized by the corporation purporting to be the mortgagor. The plaintiff has not assigned error in the court’s conclusion, nor does its assignment of errors raise any other issue of law which may be reviewed by this court. The lack of such an assignment of error is fatal to the plaintiff’s appeal. Practice Book § 652; Charlton Press, Inc. v. Sullivan, 153 Conn. 103, 113, 214 A.2d 354; Maltbie, Conn. App. Proc. § 167. The claims of error which the plaintiff does raise are addressed to findings of fact made by the court and are necessarily irrelevant since there are no issues of law properly before us. See Practice Book §§ 622, 628; Martin v. Kavanewsky, 157 Conn. 514, 516, 255 A.2d 619; Maltbie, op. cit. § 157.

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.2d 543, 159 Conn. 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewin-sons-inc-v-framularo-conn-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack