This dispositive issue was fully considered in the opinion of the Appellate Court; id.; and it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion contained therein. See Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 225 Conn. 447, 449, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). Because the factual circumstances of this case do not furnish us a full and reasoned opportunity to consider the underlying issue of the scope of §§ 29-389 and 29-391, we conclude that the plaintiff's appeal should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.
The underlying issues have been fully considered in the opinion of the Appellate Court; Tovish v. Gerber Electronics, supra, 32 Conn. App. 605-608; and it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion therein contained. See State v. Murray, 225 Conn. 524, 527-28, 624 A.2d 377 (1993); Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 225 Conn. 447, 449, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). Our grant of certification was improvident because we find ourselves unable to draw a bright line distinction, for all cases of sales persons based at in-home offices, between activities in the course of employment and activities that are merely preparatory to the course of employment.
The issues raised by the certified appeal have been fully and persuasively considered in the opinion of the Appellate Court; id.; and it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion therein contained. See Arway v. Bloom, 227 Conn. 799, 801-802, 633 A.2d 281 (1993); Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 225 Conn. 447, 449, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993); Hyatt v. Milford, 224 Conn. 441, 445, 619 A.2d 450 (1993).
The issues have been fully and persuasively considered in the opinion of the Appellate Court; Arway v. Bloom, supra, 473-81; and it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion therein contained. See Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 225 Conn. 447, 449, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993); Hyatt v. Milford, 224 Conn. 441, 445, 619 A.2d 450 (1993). At oral argument before this court, the parties agreed that subsequent applications to the zoning commission have, for practical purposes, cured the procedural default upon which the trial court ruled and upon which the Appellate Court based its decision.
"At a probable cause hearing on a prejudgment remedy, a trial court may properly consider all evidence presented, including testimony of witnesses, documentary evidence, and affidavits." Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 28 Conn.App. 221, 225, 610 A.2d 707 (1992), appeal dismissed, 225 Conn. 447, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). "[I]t is well settled that, in determining whether to grant a prejudgment remedy, the trial court must evaluate both parties’ evidence as well as any defenses, counterclaims and setoffs ... Such consideration is significant because a valid defense has the ability to defeat a finding of probable cause."
Kosiorek v. Smigelski, 112 Conn.App. 315, 319, 962 A.2d 880, cert. denied, 291 Conn. 903, 967 A.2d 113 (2009); see also 36 DeForest Avenue, LLC v. Creadore, 99 Conn.App. 690, 698, 915 A.2d 916, cert. denied, 282 Conn. 905, 920 A.2d 311 (2007) (stating that the burden of proof at a probable cause hearing is a low one). "At a probable cause hearing on a prejudgment remedy, a trial court may properly consider all evidence presented, including testimony of witnesses, documentary evidence and affidavits." Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 28 Conn.App. 221, 225, 610 A.2d 707 (1992), appeal dismissed, 225 Conn. 447, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). The defendant's listing of the 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 25, VIN 1GCHLK24K17E518023 establishes probable cause that the defendant has wrongfully detained the vehicle.
In making its determination of probable cause, the court may consider both facts set forth in the plaintiff's affidavit and facts presented at the hearing. McCahill, supra, 185 Conn. 39; Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 28 Conn.App. 221, 225, 610 A.2d 707 (1992), appeal dismissed, 225 Conn. 447, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). The probable cause standard applies not only to the factual issues, but to the legal issues as well.
In making its determination of probable cause, the court may consider both facts set forth in the plaintiff's affidavit and facts presented at the hearing. McCahill, supra, 185 Conn. 39; Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 28 Conn. App. 221, 225, 610 A.2d 707 (1992), appeal dismissed, 225 Conn. 447, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). The probable cause standard applies not only to the factual issues, but to the legal issues as well.
In making its determination of probable cause, the court may consider both facts set forth in the plaintiff's affidavit and facts presented at the hearing. McCahill, supra, 185 Conn. 39; Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 28 Conn. App. 221, 225, 610 A.2d 707 (1992), appeal dismissed, 225 Conn. 447, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993) The probable cause standard applies not only to the factual issues, but to the legal issues as well. Based on the credible evidence produced at the prejudgment remedy hearing the court finds that Krom obtained a judgment against Richard on February 25, 2000 in the amount of $50,229.00 and a judgment against Richard on April 11, 1995 in the amount of $6923.00; both judgments to be paid in one-hundred dollar ($100) monthly payments on each judgment. Richard is presently current in his monthly payment yet the judgments are unsatisfied with a total balance of $59,350.00.
In making its determination of probable cause, the court may consider both facts set forth in the plaintiff's affidavit and facts presented at the hearing. McCahill, supra, 185 Conn. 39; Fleet Bank of Connecticut v. Dowling, 28 Conn. App. 221, 225, 610 A.2d 707 (1992), appeal dismissed, CT Page 16563 225 Conn. 447, 623 A.2d 1005 (1993). The probable cause standard applies not only to the factual issues, but to the legal issues as well.