LiVolsi v. Pylypchuk

Frank E. LiVolsi, Jr., (Estate of Isabel Rafferty Bruno) v. Lorraine Pylypchuk

LiVolsi v. Pylypchuk, 532 A.2d 593 (Conn. App. Ct. 1987)

Court: Connecticut Appellate Court · State Appellate Courts
Decided: October 27, 1987
Docket: No. 5278
Citations: 532 A.2d 59312 Conn. App. 5271987 Conn. App. LEXIS 1103

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

The plaintiffs 1 brought this action to set aside the conveyance of real property by the decedent to the defendant. The case was referred to an attorney trial referee pursuant to General Statutes § 52-434 (a) (4). After trial, the attorney referee filed a report setting forth his findings and recommending that judgment should issue in favor of the plaintiffs. On appeal from the judgment rendered by the trial court accepting the report of the attorney trial referee, the defendant challenges two findings of the attorney trial referee.

Practice Book § 438 requires that a party challenging the factual findings of an attorney trial referee must file a motion to correct with the trial court within two weeks after the filing of the referee’s report. The defendant, however, failed to file such a motion in the present case. Having filed no motion to correct any of the facts found by the attorney trial referee, the defendant has waived any right to attack the subordinate factual findings contained in the report. Seal Audio, Inc. v. Bozak, Inc., 199 Conn. 496, 518 , 508 A.2d 415 (1986); Kowalsky Properties, Inc. v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 7 Conn. App. 136, 140 , 508 A.2d 43 (1986); Ruhl v. Fairfield, 5 Conn. App. 104, 106 , 496 A.2d 994 (1985). Furthermore, the defendant failed to object to the trial court’s acceptance of the report pursuant to Practice Book § 440 and, therefore, the conclusions reached in the report must stand. Seal Audio, Inc. v. Bozak, Inc., supra. Accordingly, we decline to review the judgment of the trial court. Id.

There is no error.

The plaintiffs are the executor of the estate of the decedent and the decedent’s three grandchildren.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 13 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts13

Relies on it most ⓘ

Bernard v. Gershman559 A.2d 1171 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989)
Rostenberg-Doern Co. v. Weiner552 A.2d 827 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989)
Rowan Construction Corp. v. Hassane549 A.2d 1085 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988) · Dissent
Dorsen v. Kay538 A.2d 1080 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988)
O'Connell, Flaherty & Attmore, LLC v. Doody3 A.3d 969 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010)
Humiston v. Intervest Management Co.554 A.2d 296 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989)

Most recent

O'Connell, Flaherty & Attmore, LLC v. Doody3 A.3d 969 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010)
Landmark Builders, Inc. v. Brower, No. Cv95 0049114s (Mar. 23, 1998)1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 4004 (1998)
McClain v. Byers, No. Cv 930301761s (May 6, 1997)1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 4940 (1997)
Nichols v. Clark, No. 277623 (Dec. 17, 1996)1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 6720 (1996)
Standard Oil v. Southport Contracting, No. Cv92 029 74 67 S (Sep. 11, 1996)1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5495-H (1996)
Fleet Bank v. Brooks Development Corp., No. Cv90-318081 (Jun. 14, 1996)1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 4780 (1996)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Seal Audio, Inc. v. Bozak, Inc., 508 A.2d 415 (Conn. 1986)	108
	Ruhl v. Town of Fairfield, 496 A.2d 994 (Conn. App. Ct. 1985)	60
	Kowalsky Props., Inc. v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 508 A.2d 43 (Conn. App. Ct. 1986)	25

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list