Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ******************************************************

STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. SUNRISE HERBAL REMEDIES, INC., ET AL. STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. DAVID HOFFMAN ET AL. (SC 18371)
Rogers, C. J., and Norcott, Katz, Palmer, Vertefeuille, Zarella and McLachlan, Js.* Argued March 18--officially released June 8, 2010

Robert W. Clark, assistant attorney general, with whom were Phillip Rosario, assistant attorney general,

and, on the brief, Richard Blumenthal, attorney general, and Brendan T. Flynn and Jose Rene Martinez Onofre, assistant attorneys general, for the appellant (state). James W. Oliver, with whom, on the brief, was Sylvia M. Ho, for the appellees (named defendant et al. in each case). Thomas A. Kaelin, for the appellee (intervening defendant Wachovia Bank, N.A.).

Opinion

KATZ, J. The plaintiff, the state of Connecticut, appeals from the decision of the trial court granting the motions of the defendants, Valerie Hawk-Hoffman and David Hoffman,1 to dissolve prejudgment attachments originally filed against their property on which the intervening defendant Wachovia Bank, N.A. (Wachovia), had held a mortgage.2 The state claims that the trial court improperly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the applications for those attachments because the applications had not complied with the requirements of General Statutes

Download State v. Sunrise Herbal Remedies, Inc..pdf

Connecticut Law