Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Pototschnig

Citations

• 200 Conn. App. 554

Syllabus

The plaintiff sought to foreclose a mortgage on certain real property owned by the defendant P, who filed an answer with special defenses and counterclaims. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion to strike all of the defendant's special defenses and counterclaims. Several of the special defenses challenged the plaintiff's standing to commence the foreclosure action. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court determined that the plaintiff had standing and granted the plaintiff's motion to strike the special defenses that implicated the plaintiff's standing and denied the motion to strike as to the remaining special defenses and all of the counterclaims. The trial court thereafter rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed to this court. Held: 1. The trial court properly determined that the plaintiff had standing to bring the foreclosure action; the court found credible evidence demonstrated that the note had been endorsed in blank prior to the commencement of the foreclosure action and had been in the plaintiff's possession until the time of trial; moreover, the defendant failed to rebut the presumption that the plaintiff, as holder of the note, was the rightful owner of the debt, as the court clearly credited testimony regarding when the note was endorsed and rejected assertions made by the defendant that the plaintiff was not in possession of the note during a certain time period. 2. Contrary to the defendant's claim, the trial court properly concluded that a decision of a New York court did not have preclusive effect under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel; the parties in the present case were not in privity with the parties in the New York case and the cases involved factually distinct claims and different loans. 3. The defendant's claim that the trial court erred in failing to consider whether the trust for which the plaintiff is trustee ever received the note and mortgage was unavailing; the court