Scholz v. Epstein, 341 Conn. 1 (2021)

Citation: Scholz v. Epstein, 341 Conn. 1 (2021)
Parent Document: Scholz v. Epstein, 341 Conn. 1 (2021)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2021-09-29
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6244827/scholz-v-epstein/ ↗

Full Text

1,290 chars

341 Conn. 1                 JANUARY, 2022                                      3
                                       Scholz v. Epstein
             present case to the extent that the defendant’s delayed recording of the
             certificate of foreclosure on the land records and his role in the subse-
             quent sale of the property purportedly occurred outside the scope of
             the foreclosure action: the defendant, in his capacity as B Co.’s attorney
             in the foreclosure proceeding, was required by statute (§ 49-16) to record
             the foreclosure certificate on the land records, and, thus, that act was
             conducted in connection with, and as a required step in, the foreclosure
             proceeding; moreover, with respect to the defendant’s conduct in
             assisting B Co. with the sale of the property, although the plaintiff alleged
             that B Co. had ultimately sold the property to a third party, the plaintiff
             did not allege that the defendant was involved in the sale of the property
             in any way or that he otherwise committed statutory theft in relation
             to that sale.
                   Argued April 28—officially released September 29, 2021* Procedural History

Other Sections in This Document (72)

Full Text