Skip to main content
· 3/2/2021

Bank of New York Mellon v. Madison

Citations

  • 203 Conn. App. 8

Syllabus

The plaintiff bank sought to foreclose a mortgage on certain real property in Woodbridge owned by the defendants R and M. Following several antecedent assignments, the mortgage was assigned to the plaintiff on the Woodbridge land records, and, subsequently, R defaulted on the note which was secured by the mortgage. The plaintiff provided R and M with written notice of the default, which was not cured, and thereafter commenced this action. The plaintiff appended to its original complaint a copy of the schedule affixed to the mortgage containing a description of the property. The plaintiff subsequently filed an amended two count complaint, alleging, in count one, a claim for foreclosure and appending an amended schedule that described an additional parcel of land that abutted the previously identified parcel. The plaintiff asserted in count two a claim for reformation of the mortgage, which alleged that the property description in the schedule appended to the plaintiff's original complaint was inaccurate, and that the amended schedule set forth the correct description of the property. The court thereafter granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to liability on its foreclosure claim. Following a hearing, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for judgment of strict foreclosure and, immediately thereafter, the plaintiff's counsel orally moved for judgment on the reformation claim. The court reserved decision on the plaintiff's oral motion for judgment at the hearing, but subsequently granted the motion. From the judgment ren- dered thereon, R and M appealed to this court. Held: 1. The trial court improperly granted the plaintiff's oral motion for judgment on its reformation claim: the plaintiff failed to produce any evidence in support of its reformation claim, R and M were not defaulted as to the plaintiff's amended complaint, and the plaintiff never moved for summary judgment on its reformation claim; accordingly, there was no basis on which the court

Judges: Alvord; Prescott; Moll

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.