Bordiere v. Chandler

Citations

• 236 Conn. App. 320

Syllabus

The plaintiff appealed from the trial court's judgment for the defendant on her special defense of promissory estoppel in the plaintiff's mortgage foreclosure action. After the note had matured but there was still an outstand- ing balance due to the plaintiff, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into an oral agreement that the defendant would pay the outstanding property taxes that the plaintiff had failed to pay as required by the terms of the mortgage, and, in return, the plaintiff would release her from further pay- ments on the outstanding debt and send her the deed to the property. The plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the court erred in finding for the defendant on her special defense of promissory estoppel. Held: The trial court did not err in finding that the plaintiff's action was barred by the doctrine of promissory estoppel, as the court was within its province to determine that the defendant's testimony regarding her agreement with the plaintiff was credible and persuasive and was corroborated by her payment of the delinquent taxes and by the testimony of an attorney for the city where the property was located. This court declined to review the plaintiff's claim that her agreement with the defendant was unenforceable under the statute of frauds (§ 52-550 (a)) because it was not in writing, as the plaintiff failed to preserve that claim in the trial court. Argued September 8—officially released November 11, 2025