Skip to main content
· 8/1/2023

U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Booker

Citations

  • 220 Conn. App. 783

Syllabus

W Co., the plaintiff's predecessor in interest, sought to foreclose a mortgage on certain real property owned by the defendants. The defendants had executed a promissory note in the original principal amount of $231,920, which was secured by the mortgage. Thereafter, the defendants signed a loan modification agreement that they had negotiated with O Co., a loan servicing company, the terms of which, inter alia, increased the outstanding principal amount of the debt to $400,706.05. O Co. did not sign the loan modification agreement. After the defendants defaulted on the note and mortgage due to the nonpayment of monthly installments of principal and interest, W Co. declared the entire balance of the note due and payable and sought strict foreclosure of the mortgaged property. Thereafter, W Co. assigned the mortgage to the plaintiff, and the trial court granted W Co.'s motion to substitute the plaintiff as a party to the action. The trial court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to liability and rendered a judgment of strict foreclosure. The trial court denied the defendants' motion for reconsideration. The defendants filed a motion to open and vacate the judgment, asserting, for the first time, that there was a discrepancy between the debt amount alleged in the complaint and that found in the strict foreclosure judg- ment. Two days later, the defendants filed their first appeal, claiming that the trial court erred in denying their motion for reconsideration. Approximately one week later, pursuant to the applicable statute (§ 49- 15), title to the mortgaged property vested in the plaintiff. This court dismissed the appeal as moot, and our Supreme Court denied the defen- dants' petition for certification to appeal. Thereafter, the defendants filed a memorandum of law in support of their motion to open and vacate the judgment, claiming that the trial court made a fundamental mistake in relying on the principal debt amount listed in the plaintiff's af

Judges: Bright; Suarez; Seeley

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.