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. ******************************************************

UNIFUND CCR PARTNERS v. ELLEN A. SCHAEPPI ET AL. (AC 30474)
Harper, Robinson and West, Js. Argued November 20, 2009--officially released February 1, 2011

(Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of

Hartford, Hon. Robert Satter, judge trial referee.) Scott Dellaventura, with whom, on the brief, was Joseph M. Tobin, for the appellant (plaintiff). Kirk D. Tavtigian, Jr., for the appellees (named defendant et al.).

Opinion

WEST, J. In this foreclosure action, the plaintiff, Unifund CCR Partners, appeals from the judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants Ellen A. Schaeppi and Ernest A. Schaeppi.1 The plaintiff claims on appeal that the trial court improperly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Specifically, the plaintiff argues that the court improperly (1) granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment because it lacked the requisite memorandum of law accompanying it pursuant to Practice Book

Download Unifund CCR Partners v. Schaeppi Published in Connecticut Law Journal - 1/25/11:

Connecticut Law