Zatakia v. Ecoair Corp.
128 Conn. App. 362
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2011Background
- Ecoair, a Delaware corporation, executed a promissory note to Globe Scott Motors for $125,000 on March 2, 1995, due October 2, 1997, with 10% annual interest.
- From 1992–1995 Ecoair engaged in business with Globe; the note reflects past due services.
- On April 26, 2001, plaintiff Kirtida Zatakia purchased the note from Globe for 25,000 Indian rupees.
- On August 28, 2001, plaintiff demanded payment; Ecoair acknowledged debt and assignment by a 2001 letter signed by Ecoair's president, but paid nothing.
- Plaintiff filed suit in April 2008; Ecoair asserted statutes of limitations defenses under 42a-3-118 and 52-576; plaintiff denied.
- Trial in March 2010 featured a 2005 letter on Ecoair letterhead, signed by its president Knudsen, acknowledged by auditors, which the court admitted as business record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court properly considered avoidance of the statute of limitations without pleading | Plaintiff asserts the court could consider tolling evidence despite no 10-57 pleading by plaintiff. | Defendant contends the claim in avoidance was not properly raised in reply to defenses. | Not an abuse; court may consider; better practice to plead, but permissible. |
| Whether the 2005 letter tolls the statute of limitations | 2005 letter constitutes a clear acknowledgment of indebtedness, tolling the limitation period. | No unequivocal acknowledgment; evidence insufficient to toll. | Court's finding not clearly erroneous; 2005 letter tolls the limitations period. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cadle Co. v. Errato, 71 Conn.App. 447 (2002) (standard for reviewing trial findings on statute tolling)
- Schilberg Integrated Metals Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co., 263 Conn. 245 (2003) (abuse of discretion standard in trial-court rulings)