Page 26 - CLT120720

26 ¦ DECEMBER 7, 2020 CONNECTICUT OPINIONS

SUPREME COURT Appellate Court rejected each of the defendant’s
defenses, affirming strict foreclosure, and upheld
the trial court’s ruling on reimbursement of taxes
and insurance premiums, reasoning it was a mat-
CREDITORS’ AND DEBTORS’ RIGHTS • ter of the court’s broad equitable discretion. De-
REAL ESTATE fendant appealed, arguing that under §49-14 a
trial court may only award money damages in a
Mortgagee Not Entitled to Pursue strict foreclosure. The court found the trial court
abused its discretion by ordering the defendants to
Property Taxes and Insurance reimburse plaintiffs for property taxes and insur-
Reimbursement Pending Strict ance premiums because it was inconsistent with
Foreclosure the remedial scheme available in strict foreclosure.
The court reasoned that, by pursuing foreclosure,
CASE: JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat’l Ass’n v. Essaghof the plaintiff elected its equity remedy. The court
COURT: Connecticut Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the Appellate Court and
DOC. NO.: SC 20090 trial court with respect to reimbursement.
COURT OPINION BY: McDonald
DATE: August 20, 2020 • PAGES: 15
on residential APPELLATE COURT
Defendants executed mortgage
property located in Weston, and eventually de-
faulted on loan payments. Plaintiffs were awarded
a judgment of strict foreclosure. Defendants ap-
pealed, which triggered an appellate stay during CRIMINAL APPEALS

which time the defendants continued to live at the Court Finds Trial Court Must Find
residence while the plaintiffs paid property taxes
and insurance premiums on the property to pro- Explicit Willfulness in Refusal to Pay
tect their security interest. Plaintiffs requested Restitution
a lift of the appellate stay, and the court denied
the motion; however, the court granted the plain- CASE: State of Connecticut v. Parker
tiff’s motion for equitable relief of reimbursement COURT: Connecticut Appellate Court
of property tax and insurance premiums paid on DOC. NO.: AC 43344
the property. The court arranged for defendants COURT OPINION BY: Prescott
to reimburse payments made from the closing of DATE: November 24, 2020 • PAGES: 17
the initial action to the end of the appellate liti- Defendant pleaded guilty to larceny and bur-
gation, noting however that it could not hold the glary charges and was sentenced to three years’
defendants in contempt for failure to pay, but in- probation and ordered to pay restitution. Defen-
stead threatened them with imprisonment if they dant testified that he was unable to find employ-
refused. Eventually the stay was lifted and the ment, and therefore did not make any restitution

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune