Home/Connecticut Appellate Court/Rocherolle v. Godina

Rocherolle v. Godina

551 A.2d 420, 17 Conn. App. 814, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 474
CourtConnecticut Appellate Court
DecidedDecember 5, 1988
Docket6424
StatusPublished

This text of 551 A.2d 420 (Rocherolle v. Godina) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rocherolle v. Godina, 551 A.2d 420, 17 Conn. App. 814, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 474 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A review of the record discloses that a summary judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants before the pleadings were closed. “A motion for summary judgment may be filed by any party at any time, addressed to the claim or counterclaim, after the pleadings are closed as between the parties to the motion. Practice Book § 379.” (Emphasis added.) Esposito v. Wethered, 4 Conn. App. 641, 644, 496 A.2d 222 (1985).

There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with law.

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

Related

Esposito v. Wethered
496 A.2d 222 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
551 A.2d 420, 17 Conn. App. 814, 1988 Conn. App. LEXIS 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rocherolle-v-godina-connappct-1988.