Charles Fisher v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION # 214

The plaintiff has moved for a determination of whether a certain affidavit filed by the defendant Countrywide Home Loans (CHL) was produced and submitted in bad faith and whether the plaintiff would be entitled to have such an affidavit expunged from the pending file.   The plaintiff is not relying on any particular section of the practice book to include that section pertaining to the Motion To Strike.  (Practice Book 10–39 et seq.)   Therefore, the Court cannot test the legal sufficiency of any such subject affidavits or memoranda that may have been filed by the defendant(s) in relation to the plaintiff's request in the pending motion (# 214).

The plaintiff's motion would be subject to an evidentiary hearing and argument as to the admissibility of any affidavits that have been filed by any party, to include the plaintiff.   Such matters are usually reserved to the time of trial and are determined typically under the rules of evidence and not any specific section of the practice book.   The plaintiff's allegations that certain filings have been made in bad faith (Practice Book Section 10–5) would always require a hearing and some evidentiary findings and are not suitable to be decided “on the papers.”   This matter which now is on its fifth sub-file is still in its pleading and discovery stages although there has been voluminous submittals by way of attachments to the various motions that have been filed.   The plaintiff's assertion that “this is a matter for the court to unravel” (Paragraph 7–Plaintiff's Brief) is ill-founded.

The plaintiff's motion has been objected to by the defendant and could conceivably be claimed for argument although the underlying decision that the plaintiff is questioning involved the plaintiff's Motion For Partial Summary Judgment (dated March 20, 2010) which was objected to by the defendant and the objection was sustained by the Court on May 3, 2010 (# 193).

The plaintiff's attempt to reargue that underlying motion for summary judgment is hereby denied and any further requests concerning the validity, authenticity, or probity of any filings done by any of the defendants would require further hearing or in the alternative should be deferred until time of trial.

BY THE. COURT,

Roche, J.

Roche, Vincent E., J.