From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Worldwide Asset v. Hickey

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford
Jun 10, 2009
2009 Ct. Sup. 9479 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2009)

Opinion

No. CV-09-5011400-S

June 10, 2009


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION TO DISMISS


FACTS

The plaintiff filed a complaint dated February 26, 2009 with a return date of April 28, 2009. The plaintiff is a business with an address of Las Vegas, Nevada. The recognizance in the complaint was signed by Victor Shapiro of Pawtucket, Rhode Island. The defendant has filed a Motion to Dismiss for insufficiency of process because the recognizance does not satisfy the Practice Book nor Connecticut General Statute Section 52-185. In response to the defendant's motion, counsel for Worldwide Asset Purchasing II LLC., filed a certificate of financial responsibility for the plaintiff. This certificate was submitted beyond the 30 days permitted by P.B. 10-59.

The Defendant objects to the certificate because it is beyond the 30 days but also because the financially responsible party is located in another State.

LEGAL DISCUSSION

The complaint in this matter names Victor Shapiro as a recognizance. This individual is a resident of Pawtucket, Rhode Island and thus does not satisfy the requirements of Practice Book Section 8-3.

The inadequate recognizance or the absence of a recognizance is not a jurisdictional defect. Sinoway Family Partnership v. ZBA, 50 C.S. 513 (2007). The court has the discretion to order a bond in any action where the bond taken is insufficient or the court hears a motion to dismiss. Connecticut Practice Book Sections 8-5(b) and 8-6.

In the instant action, the plaintiff has already attempted to correct the insufficient recognizance by filing a certificate of financial responsibility. The party named as the responsible person in this certificate is from another state. The use of an out of state person who is also the plaintiff does raise some concern as to the security for collection of the costs. The court has the discretion to determine a sufficient bond.

Therefore, the Court DENIES the Motion to Dismiss and orders that the Plaintiff file a bond in the amount of $250.00 within two weeks, that is, on or before June 24, 2009.


Summaries of

Worldwide Asset v. Hickey

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford
Jun 10, 2009
2009 Ct. Sup. 9479 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2009)
Case details for

Worldwide Asset v. Hickey

Case Details

Full title:WORLDWIDE ASSET v. DORA HICKEY

Court:Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford

Date published: Jun 10, 2009

Citations

2009 Ct. Sup. 9479 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2009)