From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

L, S L Bethany v. Baldwin

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Aug 8, 2000
756 A.2d 317 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000)

Opinion

(AC 19355)

Argued April 26, 2000

Officially released August 8, 2000

Procedural History

Action to recover damages for, inter alia, breach of contract in connection with the purchase and sale of certain real property, and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Haven, where the court, Moran, J., granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and rendered judgment thereon, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Affirmed.

Max F. Brunswick, for the appellant (plaintiff).

Richard M. Shapiro, for the appellee (defendant).


Opinion


In this action for breach of contract for the alleged overpayment of a mortgage note, the plaintiff, L, S L Bethany, Inc., appeals from a summary judgment rendered in favor of the defendant, Malcolm W. Baldwin. The plaintiff claims that the defendant accepted a check for the payment of the mortgage with a notation written on it reserving the plaintiff's right to bring an action disputing the amount of the debt. The trial court granted summary judgment on the theory of res judicata. A previous action between these parties resolved the issue of the amount the plaintiff owed on the mortgage note. The plaintiff claims, however, that it is not precluded from challenging the debt because of the notation written on the check.

"It is the responsibility of the appellant to provide an adequate record for review." Practice Book § 61-10. In this case, the record is inadequate for review because we have not been provided with either a written memorandum of decision or a transcribed copy of an oral decision signed by the trial court. See Practice Book § 64-1. Moreover, the record does not contain the check on which the plaintiff bases its case, nor does the record contain any affidavit from the plaintiff regarding the facts in dispute. Accordingly, we conclude that the plaintiff's claim is not reviewable. See Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB v. Saucier, 48 Conn. App. 709, 710, 709 A.2d 610 (1998); Chase Manhattan Bank/City Trust v. AECO Elevator Co., 48 Conn. App. 605, 607-609, 710 A.2d 190 (1998).


Summaries of

L, S L Bethany v. Baldwin

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Aug 8, 2000
756 A.2d 317 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000)
Case details for

L, S L Bethany v. Baldwin

Case Details

Full title:L, S L BETHANY, INC. v. MALCOLM W. BALDWIN

Court:Appellate Court of Connecticut

Date published: Aug 8, 2000

Citations

756 A.2d 317 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000)
756 A.2d 317