V M Food Distributors v. Terzis, No. Cv 92-0452097s (Dec. 17, 1993)
This text of 1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 11329 (V M Food Distributors v. Terzis, No. Cv 92-0452097s (Dec. 17, 1993)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The court acknowledges that business failure combined with domestic problems can place tremendous stress on a person. However, in the captioned matter the documentary evidence was CT Page 11330 within the possession of the movant. His failure to produce to his counsel, or to realize its importance at trial time is not a basis for the court to grant this motion.
Further, the court realizes that the additional stresses induced by domestic problems may compound existing problems. In the present case, it appears that the movant failed to produce all necessary business documents to his attorney. That these documents might be of assistance in the final result in the movant's defense.
Such arguments by a party seeking to open a judgment, can conceivably be made in most cases. The court's action must, however, be made because that evidence "could not have been known and with reasonable diligence produced at trial." Corbin v. Corbin,
The motion is denied.
JULIUS J. KREMSKI STATE TRIAL REFEREE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 11329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/v-m-food-distributors-v-terzis-no-cv-92-0452097s-dec-17-1993-connsuperct-1993.