Tarnowsky v. Socci, No. Cv00 0177148 S (Dec. 19, 2001)

2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 16901
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided December 19, 2001·No. No. CV00 0177148 S·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

ORDER
The defendant, Leggatt McCall Property Management of Connecticut, Inc. (Leggatt), filed a motion to reargue the decision rendered by this court on November 20, 2001, denying Leggatt's motion for summary judgment. In denying Leggatt's motion for summary judgment, this court carefully considered the issues and arguments raised by the parties. The cases and arguments presented in Leggatt's motion to reargue fail to persuade this court to revisit these issues. See Opoku v. Grant, 63 Conn. App. 686,692-93, 778 A.2d 981 (2001) ("[al motion to reargue . . . is not to be used as an opportunity . . . to present additional cases or briefs which could have been presented at the time of the original argument."). Accordingly, Leggatt's motion to reargue is denied.

So Ordered.

D'ANDREA, J.T.R. CT Page 16902

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

Tarnowsky v. Socci, No. Cv00 0177148 S (Dec. 19, 2001), 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 16901 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).

2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 16901 (Tarnowsky v. Socci, No. Cv00 0177148 S (Dec. 19, 2001)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Opoku v. Grant
778 A.2d 981 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2001)