From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayber v. Dept. of Cons. Protection

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Feb 22, 2005
87 Conn. App. 625 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005)

Opinion

No. (AC 25277).

Submitted on briefs January 7, 2005.

Officially released February 22, 2005.

Procedural History

Appeal from the decision by the defendant ordering the plaintiff to pay restitution and assessing a civil penalty against him in connection with a certain escrow agreement, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Britain and tried to the court, Owens, J.; judgment affirming the defendant's decision, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Affirmed.

Richard E. Hayber filed a brief for the appellant (plaintiff).

Richard Blumenthal, attorney general, and Alan N. Ponanski, assistant attorney general, filed a brief for the appellee (defendant).


Opinion


The plaintiff, Eugene A. Hayber, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, which affirmed the decision of the defendant, the department of consumer protection, real estate commission, ordering him to pay restitution, in the amount of $16,000 with interest, to third parties, and to pay a civil penalty of $2000. The plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that his failure to disburse funds that he was holding in escrow was improper absent proof that the parties to the escrow agreement had authorized in writing the disbursal of such funds. The plaintiff also claims that the court improperly concluded that he was not a party to the escrow agreement at issue in this case. We disagree with the plaintiffs claims.


Summaries of

Hayber v. Dept. of Cons. Protection

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Feb 22, 2005
87 Conn. App. 625 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005)
Case details for

Hayber v. Dept. of Cons. Protection

Case Details

Full title:EUGENE A. HAYBER v. DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION, REAL ESTATE…

Court:Appellate Court of Connecticut

Date published: Feb 22, 2005

Citations

87 Conn. App. 625 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005)
866 A.2d 644

Citing Cases

Ravenswood Construction, LLC v. Bysiewicz

(Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Hayber v. Department of Consumer Protection, 49…

D'Auria v. Solomine

In the post-trial brief of the Third-Party defendant at page 4 "Under Connecticut law, not only are brokers…