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. See Practice Book, 1978, § 385. Such a judgment is not a final judgment from which an appeal lies. New Haven Redevelopment Agency v. Research Associates, Inc., 153 Conn. 118, 120, 214 A.2d 375 (1965). Because the lack of a final judgment is a jurisdictional defect, we must dismiss the appeal. Id.
There is error in the judgment on the complaint, the judgment as to it is set aside and the case is remanded with direction to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction. As to the appeal from the counterclaim, the appeal is dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sasso v. Aleshin
...is not an appealable final judgment. Stroiney v. Crescent Lake Tax District, 197 Conn. 82, 495 A.2d 1063 (1985); Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102 (1980); New Haven Redevelopment Agency v. Research Associates, Inc., 153 Conn. 118, 120, 214 A.2d 375 Because the trial court'......
-
City of New Haven v. New Haven Police Union Local 530
...from which an appeal lies. Stroiney v. Crescent Lake Tax District, 197 Conn. 82, 84-85, 495 A.2d 1063 (1985); 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). These authorities are readily distinguis......
-
Kolenberg v. Board of Educ. of City of Stamford
...comply with it is fatal to the court's jurisdiction. Tucker v. Maher, 192 Conn. 460, 468-69, 472 A.2d 1261 (1984); Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102 (1980). "This rule is not merely a procedural regulation. It is in recognition and implementation of the basic principle tha......
-
Glasson v. Town of Portland, 3199
...as to liability has been entered but damages have not been determined, there is no appealable final judgment. Pinnix v. LaMorte, 182 Conn. 342, 343, 438 A.2d 102 (1980). In this case, however, the injunction has determined the town's rights in a manner that no further proceedings can affect......