Mancini v. Wyzik, No. Cv93-0520862 S (Apr. 13, 1994)

Connecticut Superior Court

Mancini v. Wyzik, No. Cv93-0520862 S (Apr. 13, 1994)

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 3591

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided April 13, 1994·No. No. CV93-0520862 S·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Defendant seeks to dismiss the complaint claiming that the court does not have subject matter jurisdiction of the cause by virtue of Connecticut General Statute 52-572b. That statute provides:

"No action may be brought upon any cause arising from alienation of affections or from breach of a CT Page 3592 promise to marry."

The motion to dismiss is denied. Although it would appear that certain portions of the complaint allege a breach of promise to marry, other portions of the complaint appear to allege a breach of contract wherein defendant's promises caused the plaintiff to sell her own home and to expend substantial funds to complete renovations in a home purchased by the defendant. The court has jurisdiction to hear such a breach of contract. Piccininni v. Hajus, 180 Conn. 369; Boland v. Catalano, 202 Conn. 333.

Allen, State Trial Referee

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Defendant seeks to dismiss the complaint claiming that the court does not have subject matter jurisdiction of the cause by virtue of Connecticut General Statute 52-572b. That statute provides:

"No action may be brought upon any cause arising from alienation of affections or from breach of a CT Page 3592 promise to marry."

The motion to dismiss is denied. Although it would appear that certain portions of the complaint allege a breach of promise to marry, other portions of the complaint appear to allege a breach of contract wherein defendant's promises caused the plaintiff to sell her own home and to expend substantial funds to complete renovations in a home purchased by the defendant. The court has jurisdiction to hear such a breach of contract. Piccininni v. Hajus, 180 Conn. 369; Boland v. Catalano, 202 Conn. 333.

Allen, State Trial Referee

Mancini v. Wyzik, No. Cv93-0520862 S (Apr. 13, 1994), 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 3591 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 3591 (Mancini v. Wyzik, No. Cv93-0520862 S (Apr. 13, 1994)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related