From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perricone v. Perricone

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Sep 15, 2004
859 A.2d 569 (Conn. 2004)

Summary

In Perricone v. Perricone, 271 Conn. 919, 920, 859 A.2d 569 (2004), our Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's petition for certification to appeal the following issue: " ‘ Did the Appellate Court properly dismiss the plaintiff's appeal from the trial court's award of pendente lite attorney's fees?

Summary of this case from Rostad v. Hirsch

Opinion

Wesley W. Horton and Daniel J. Krisch, in support of the petition.

Richard F. Wareing, in opposition.

Decided September 15, 2004.


The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 25461) is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly dismiss the plaintiff's appeal from the trial court's award of pendente lite attorney's fees?"

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17257.

VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.


Summaries of

Perricone v. Perricone

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Sep 15, 2004
859 A.2d 569 (Conn. 2004)

In Perricone v. Perricone, 271 Conn. 919, 920, 859 A.2d 569 (2004), our Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's petition for certification to appeal the following issue: " ‘ Did the Appellate Court properly dismiss the plaintiff's appeal from the trial court's award of pendente lite attorney's fees?

Summary of this case from Rostad v. Hirsch
Case details for

Perricone v. Perricone

Case Details

Full title:NICHOLAS PERRICONE v. MADELINE PERRICONE

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Sep 15, 2004

Citations

859 A.2d 569 (Conn. 2004)
859 A.2d 569

Citing Cases

Rostad v. Hirsch

Id.,irreversibly at 481, 988 A.2d 383. On that record, because the trial court's order did not require the…