Congress Street Condominium Ass'n v. Anderson, 33 A.3d 274

Plaintiff Congress Street Condominium Association, Inc. filed a June 10, 2009 action to foreclose a statutory lien for common charges, assessments, and fines against unit owner Frederick L. Anderson.
Anderson answered July 20, 2009 and later sought to amend to add special defenses and a counterclaim in February 2010.
Plaintiff moved to strike those defenses and counterclaim, which the trial court granted on March 30, 2010.
Plaintiff moved for summary judgment as to liability; hearing occurred April 12, 2010; Anderson did not file opposition before or at the hearing.
Anderson filed a second request to amend on April 13, 2010, adding equitable estoppel and a counterclaim; plaintiff objected as untimely.
On April 26, 2010, the court granted summary judgment as to liability and later entered a judgment of strict foreclosure; the appellate court reversed on the equitable estoppel issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is equitable estoppel a viable defense to fines in a condo lien foreclosure?	Estoppel is not a valid defense in this context and should be pursued in a separate action.	Equitable estoppel may be raised as a defense in foreclosure of fines.	Yes; estoppel may be raised and should be considered to determine liability.
Was the trial court correct to grant summary judgment without considering the estoppel defense?	Summary judgment should stand absent valid defenses.	Equitable estoppel defeats liability as a matter of law.	The court erred by not properly considering the estoppel defense; judgment reversed and remanded.

Barasso v. Rear Still Hill Road, LLC, 81 Conn.App. 798 (Conn. App. 2004) (recognizes mortgage foreclosure defenses including equitable estoppel)
LaSalle National Bank v. Freshfield Meadows, LLC, 69 Conn.App. 824 (Conn. App. 2002) (permits certain defenses in foreclosure actions)
Union Trust Co. v. Jackson, 42 Conn.App. 413 (Conn. App. 1996) (single valid defense may defeat summary judgment)