Pinnix v. LaMorte
| Decision Date | 11 November 1980 |
| Citation | 182 Conn. 342,438 A.2d 102 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | Burrie T. PINNIX v. Nicholas D. LaMORTE, Trustee. |
Jules Lang, Norwalk, for appellant(plaintiff).
James J. Farrell, Norwalk, for appellee(defendant).
Before COTTER, C. J., and BOGDANSKI, PETERS, HEALEY and PARSKEY, JJ.
The plaintiff brought this action seeking a judgment declaring a mortgage note and deed invalid on the ground that the defendant lender had charged an excessive rate of interest on the loan.The plaintiff's wife was solely liable on the note, but was never given reasonable notice of or made a party to the action.The court rendered summary judgment in the defendant's favor and the plaintiff appealed.
Practice Book, 1978, § 390(d) governing actions for declaratory judgment requires all persons having an interest in the subject matter of the complaint to be parties to the action or have reasonable notice thereof.Failure to observe this requirement deprives the court of jurisdiction over the case.State ex rel. Kelman v. Schaffer, 161 Conn. 522, 526-27, 290 A.2d 327(1971).Along with his prayer for declaratory relief, the plaintiff sought an injunction and damages.These claims must fall with the claim for a declaratory judgment because they were merely ancillary to it.Clough v. Wilson, 170 Conn. 548, 556, 368 A.2d 231(1976).
The defendant filed a counterclaim for damages resulting from the plaintiff's failure to pay to the defendant funds held as security for the note, which the defendant alleged was in default.The court's granting of summary judgment on this counterclaim is also appealed from.Neither in the judgment file nor in the memorandum of decision, however, are any damages awarded to the defendant.We therefore view the judgment as relating only to the question of liability.SeePractice Book, 1978, § 385.Such a judgment is not a final judgment from which an appeal lies.New Haven Redevelopment...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Papa v. Thimble Creek Condominium Ass'n, Inc.
...to where a judgment has been rendered on only the issue of liability without an award of damages. Such a judgment, being interlocutory in character, is not a final judgment from which an appeal lies.
Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102 (1980); Palmer v. Hartford National Bank & Trust Co., 157 Conn. 597, 253 A.2d 28 (1968); New Haven Redevelopment Agency v. Research Associates, Inc., 153 Conn. 118, 120, 214 A.2d 375 (1965)." Stroiney v. Crescent... -
Tucker v. Maher
...390(d) requires that all persons having an interest in the subject matter of the complaint be parties to the action or have reasonable notice thereof. See
Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102 (1980). This court has consistently required strict adherence to this rule. Hopkins v. Pac, 176 Conn. 318, 319, 407 A.2d 979 (1978); Cavalli v. McMahon, 174 Conn. 212, 215-16, 384 A.2d 374 (1978); Gannon v. Sanders, 157 Conn. 1, 5, 244 A.2d 397 (1968).5, 244 A.2d 397 (1968). 'A failure to comply with § 309(d) [now § 390(d) ] is a jurisdictional defect and, as such, can be raised even on appeal by the court itself.' Manley v. Pfeiffer, 176 Conn. 540, 545, 409 A.2d 1009 (1979); see Pinnix v. LaMorte, supra; State ex rel. Kelman v. Schaffer, 161 Conn. 522, 527, 290 A.2d 327 (1971). Section 390(d) is not merely a procedural regulation, '[i]t is in recognition and implementation of the basic principle thatspirit of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 giving such persons notice and is compatible with fundamental due process. See, e.g., Benz v. Walker, 154 Conn. 74, 76, 221 A.2d 841 (1966).10 Along with his prayer for declaratory relief, the plaintiff also sought damages, attorney's fees and such further relief as the court deemed proper. These claims must fall with the claim for a declaratory judgment as they are merely ancillary to it. Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102... -
Pierce v. Zoning Bd of Appeals of Town of Harwinton
...have reasonable notice thereof. Failure to observe this requirement deprives the court of jurisdiction over the case. State ex rel. Kelman v. Schaffer, 161 Conn. 522, 526-27, 290 A.2d 327 (1971)."
Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102 (1980). We have consistently required strict adherence to this rule. Echo Four v. Hill, 3 Conn.App. 118, 122-23, 485 A.2d 926, cert. denied, 195 Conn. 801, 487 A.2d 564 (1985). The subject matter of the plaintiffs' complaint... -
Tedesco v. Julius C. Pagano, Inc.
...State ex rel. Scala v. Airport Commission, 154 Conn. 168, 178, 224 A.2d 236 (1966); Cook v. Lawlor, 139 Conn. 68, 71-72, 90 A.2d 164 (1952). The trial court is in the best position to assess the burden which an amendment would [
182 Conn. 342] impose on the opposing party in light of the facts of the particular case. "The essential tests are whether the ruling of the court will work an injustice to either the plaintiff or the defendant and...