Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
ยง

Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo

33 Conn. App. 662 (Conn. App. Ct. 1994)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo

27 Citing cases

  1. Riordan v. Barbosa

    1999 Ct. Sup. 2701 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1999)   Cited 1 times

    A motion for summary judgment on the complaint made by a plaintiff may be granted "in a proper case, notwithstanding the existence of a special defense as to which there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, where the plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Sand Dollar Development Group, L.L.C. v. Peter-Michael, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven at New Haven, Docket No. 104876 (March 12, 1998); see also Union Trust Co. v. Jackson, 42 Conn. App. 413, 417, 679 A.2d 421 (1996); Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn. App. 662, 664-66, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994).Union Trust Co. v. Jackson, supra, 42 Conn. App. 413, and Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, supra, 33 Conn. App. 662, accord with the reasoning of the Sand Dollar case, despite different outcomes.

  2. Iacurci v. Sax

    313 Conn. 786 (Conn. 2014)   Cited 107 times
    Holding that tax return preparer owed client no fiduciary duty

    It is not the role of either the trial court or the Appellate Court to substitute its version of the facts for what is properly the role of the fact finder. See Bayer v. Showmotion, Inc., 292 Conn. 381, 405 n. 10, 973 A.2d 1229 (2009); see also Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn.App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). Once the predicate issue of material fact regarding the fiduciary relationship was established, in my view, it was unnecessary to consider the burden of proof, or lack thereof, related to the fraudulent concealment.

  3. Iacurci v. Sax

    SC19119 (Conn. Sep. 30, 2014)

    It is not the role of either the trial court or the Appellate Court to substitute its version of the facts for what is properly the role of the fact finder. See Bayer v. Showmotion, Inc., 292 Conn. 381, 405 n.10, 973 A.2d 1229 (2009); see also Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn. App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). Once the predicate issue of material fact regarding the fiduciary relationship was established, in my view, it was unnecessary to consider the burden of proof, or lack thereof, related to the fraudulent concealment.

  4. Fleet Bank v. Galluzzo

    642 A.2d 1206 (Conn. 1994)

    Decided April 14, 1994 The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 33 Conn. App. 662 (AC 11895), is denied. David C. Bloomberg, in support of the petition.

  5. Iacurci v. Sax

    139 Conn. App. 386 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012)   Cited 28 times
    Holding that no fiduciary relationship is created when the accountant simply prepares the client's yearly tax returns, but may arise when the accountant "undertake tasks such as managing the plaintiff's funds, advising the plaintiff with regard to investments or recommending financial transactions."

    In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the role of the trial court is to determine whether a genuine issue of material fact exists, not to decide such questions. See Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn.App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). By the same rule, appellate courts should not decide questions of fact.

  6. Iacurci v. Sax

    AC33318 (Conn. App. Ct. Dec. 4, 2012)

    In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the role of the trial court is to determine whether a genuine issue of material fact exists, not to decide such questions. See Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn. App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). By the same rule, appellate courts should not decide questions of fact. Bayer v. Showmo-tion, Inc., 292 Conn. 381, 405 n.10, 973 A.2d 1229 (2009) (function of appellate court is to review findings of fact, not make factual findings). It is axiomatic that appellate courts do not decide questions of fact. "Appellate courts do not examine the record to determine whether the trier of fact could have reached a different conclusion."

  7. Ocsai v. Exit 88 Hotel, LLC

    127 Conn. App. 731 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011)   Cited 8 times

    (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo,Michaud v. Gurney, 33 Conn.App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). " [I]ssue-finding, rather than issue-determination, is the key to the procedure.... There must be a showing that it is quite clear what the truth is, and any real doubt as to the existence of any genuine issue of material fact must be excluded."

  8. New Haven Savings Bank v. LaPlace

    66 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001)   Cited 101 times
    Upholding the decision of the trial court in part because "defendant's fiduciary duty defenses and counterclaims are irrelevant to the foreclosure issue because they do not attack the making, validity or enforcement of the note or mortgage"

    Strada v. Connecticut Newspapers, Inc., 193 Conn. 313, 317, 477 A.2d 1005 (1984). . . . Cortes v. Cotton, 31 Conn. App. 569, 572-73, 626 A.2d 1306 (1993). "Equally well settled is that the trial court does not sit as the trier of fact when ruling on a motion for summary judgment. . . . [T]he trial court's function is not to decide issues of material fact, but rather to determine whether any such issues exist. . . . Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn. App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). . . . Field v. Kearns, 43 Conn. App. 265, 270, 682 A.2d 148, cert. denied, 239 Conn. 942, 684 A.2d 711 (1996)." (Internal quotation marks omitted.)

  9. Harvey v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corp.

    52 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999)   Cited 60 times

    (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn. App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994). I

  10. Rosario v. Hasak

    50 Conn. App. 632 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998)   Cited 32 times
    In Rosario, the Appellate Court rejected a plaintiffs attempt to commence a new action pursuant to ยง 52-592 on the basis of the "trial court's conclusion that the plaintiffs failure to return the original complaint to court until two and one-half years after it was served could hardly be considered diligent.... The plaintiff commenced the fourth and final action five years after the automobile accident occurred and three years after he commenced the original action.

    Cortes v. Cotton, 31 Conn. App. 569, 572-73, 626 A.2d 1306 (1993). "Equally well settled is that the trial court does not sit as the trier of fact when ruling on a motion for summary judgment. . . . [T]he trial court's function is not to decide issues of material fact, but rather to determine whether any such issues exist. . . . Fleet Bank, N.A. v. Galluzzo, 33 Conn. App. 662, 666, 637 A.2d 803, cert. denied, 229 Conn. 910, 642 A.2d 1206 (1994)." (Internal quotation marks omitted.)