Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Gregory McGuire dba McGuire Homes v. Glenn S. Weiser et al.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY # 132 and OBJECTION # 133
This case comes to this court as a Motion to Stay the Order of the court. This court filed a Memorandum of Decision on August 22, 2013 dissolving the Mechanic's Lien. The plaintiff has filed an appeal of said judgment, and has petitioned the court to grant a stay of the discharge of the Mechanic's Lien as ordered in the judgment so that the plaintiff may exercise its statutory right to appeal, and not undermine any relevant underlying claims brought forth from its pleadings in the matter. The defendant has objected.
Although this court believes that its decision is well reasoned and founded in the law, the court considers the claim of the plaintiff. The court finds that the appeal was not taken for the purposes of delay. The court further finds that, although it believes that the plaintiff will not prevail on appeal, the court is faced with the clear language in the case of Lichtman v. Beni, 280 Conn. 25, 35–36 (2006). That case indicates that the appeal was moot on an appeal from a mechanic's lien because the defendant did not secure and record a stay of the court's order discharging the lien, and because the plaintiffs duly recorded the order of release in their municipalities Land Records. So essentially what they said was that if I deny the stay, then the defendant may file the order discharging the lien, and on appeal the case is moot.
My job is not to disagree with the Appellate Courts, but rather to follow the law. Accordingly, the court grants the stay.
The statute provides that the court may require the plaintiff to post a bond with surety for the stay of the order. The court must determine an amount which the court deems sufficient to indemnify the adverse party for any damages which may result from the stay.
The court on review of the case and having considered the arguments of the parties, and recognizing that an appeal could take up to two years and additional attorneys fees, could be incurred by the homeowner and that the lien remains on the property subject to public review, the court finds that a fair and reasonable bond under all the circumstances is a $75,000 cash or professional surety bond.
Accordingly, the stay is granted with the condition of the bond.
SO ORDERED.
EDWARD R. KARAZIN, JR.
JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE
Karazin, Edward R., J.T.R.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: FSTCV116011526S
Decided: September 06, 2013
Court: Superior Court of Connecticut.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)