Sovereign Bank v. Licata
36 A.3d 662
Conn.2012Background
- Sovereign Bank sued James Licata and others; Cynthia Licata counterclaimed for negligent misrepresentation following an oral forbearance agreement.
- Trial court entered judgment for Licata on the counterclaim, awarding $500,000 after a jury verdict.
- Plaintiff challenged the verdict, arguing the misrepresentation claim rested on the forbearance agreement barred by the statute of frauds, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-550(a)(4).
- Appellate Court held the misrepresentation claim rested on foreclosure-period representations, not solely on the oral forbearance agreement, so it was not barred by the statute of frauds.
- This court granted certification to review whether the statute of frauds prevents tort claims relying on terms of a barred agreement.
- The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as improvidently certified; the certification was improper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the statute of frauds bar the tort claim? | Sovereign Bank argues the claim relies on the barred forbearance agreement. | Licata contends the misrepresentation claim rests on foreclose-period conduct, not solely on the agreement. | Certification dismissed; statute of frauds issue not properly certified. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sovereign Bank v. Licata, 293 Conn. 935 (2009) (tort claim reliance on terms barred by § 52-550(a)(4))
- Sovereign Bank v. Licata, 116 Conn.App. 483 (2009) (Appellate Court held misrepresentation claim not barred by statute of frauds)