arrow left
arrow right
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
  • PENNA, JASON v. TRANQUILLO, ANGELO G. Et AlP10 - Property - Partition document preview
						
                                

Preview

DOCKET NO: AAN-CV21-6041868-S : SUPERIOR COURT JASON PENNA : J.D. OF ANSONIA/MILFORD VS. : AT MILFORD ANGELO G. TRANQUILLO AND MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION : SYSTEMS, INC. as NOMINEE FOR HOMEBRIDGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. : FEBRUARY 29, 2024 DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS The defendant respectfully objects to the plaintiff’s Motion for Order dated February 21, 2024 (No. 142.00.). In support thereof, it is admitted that depositions were noticed for February 20, 2024. Unfortunately, defense counsel got a notice for a hearing on the same date as well as a deposition for a case which begins trial this month. Defense counsel attempted to get coverage and was unsuccessful in securing coverage in the office. For that reason, defense counsel had to notify plaintiff’s counsel that the depositions could not go forward on February 20th. In the e- mail to plaintiff’s counsel, defense counsel indicated that if there was a cost for late cancellation for the court reporter that this office would cover said cost. More importantly, defense counsel provided an alternative date of March 8, 2024. Rather than responding to the offered date, plaintiff’s counsel filed the Motion for Order at issue. Respectfully, as this court well knows, court dates are assigned often without any input from the attorneys involved in the case. As attempted to be explained to plaintiff’s counsel, unfortunately, a court date was assigned for February 20th. Again, defense counsel attempted to secure coverage and was unsuccessful and therefore had no choice but to cancel the depositions. Again, defense counsel offered to cover the costs if there was such a cost for a late cancellation and further offered up March 8th as an opportunity to take the depositions. Again, rather than attempting to work out this issue, plaintiff’s counsel filed this motion. Respectfully, the defendant asks that the Motion for Order be denied. In the alternative, we ask that we be allowed to provide a date in which the depositions can take place. In fact, we are ready and prepared to do the depositions on a weekend if that is what is required between both attorneys’ court calendars. Again, respectfully, the defendant objects to this Motion for Order. THE DEFENDANT ANGELO TRANQUILLO /s/ Patrick M. Mullins Patrick M. Mullins, Esq. COTTER, COTTER & MULLINS, LLC 6515 Main Street, Second Floor Trumbull, CT 06611 Telephone: (203) 331-0774 Juris No. 414935 ORDER The foregoing Objection is hereby: SUSTAINED/OVERRULED Clerk/Judge CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was electronically filed and/or mailed, postage prepaid, on February 29, 2024 to the following counsel of record and pro se parties: Francis Lieto, Esq. Goldman Gruder Woods, LLC 105 Technology Drive Trumbull, CT 06611 flieto@goldmangruderwoods.com STeixeira@goldgru.com BENDETT & MCHUGH PC 270 FARMINGTON AVENUE SUITE 151 FARMINGTON, CT 06032 WDziedzic@bmpc-law.com /s/ Patrick M. Mullins Patrick M. Mullins