Opinion
CV176024145S
04-06-2018
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC v. Raisa LARDIE, Co-Administratrix et al.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
OPINION
By John W. Moran, J.T.R.
The plaintiff commenced the instant foreclosure action by way of a Summons and Complaint dated August 9, 2017, regarding real property located at 152 Highland Avenue Extension, Beacon Falls, Connecticut. The borrower on the subject mortgage died on March 6, 2016.
On September 19, 2017, the defendants filed an Answer, Special Defenses and Counterclaims. The plaintiff has moved to strike the Counterclaims.
Practice Book § 10-39 provides:
Whenever any party wishes to contest (1) the legal sufficiency of the allegations of any complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or of any one or more counts thereof, to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or ... (5) the legal sufficiency of any answer to any complaint, counterclaim or cross-complaint, or any part of that answer including any special defense contained therein, that party may do so by filing a motion to strike the contested pleading or part thereof.
A motion to strike is proper to contest the legal sufficiency of a counterclaim. Morgan Chase Bank v. Rodrigues, 109 Conn.App. 125, 131, 952 A.2d 56 (2008). A motion to strike admits all well-pleaded allegations; it cannot be opposed by facts outside the attached pleading. Liljedahl Brothers, Inc. v. Grigsby, 215 Conn. 345, 348, 576 A.2d 149 (1990). " In determining whether a motion to strike should be granted, the sole question is whether, if the facts alleged arc taken to be true, the allegations provide a cause of action or a defense." County Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Eastern Associates, 3 Conn.App. 582, 585, 491 A.2d 401 (1985).
The Counterclaims are titled " Trespass to Land" and " CUTPA." Simply stated, these " Counterclaims" are merely bare bones skeletal conclusions which lack specific facts to support any conclusions. The plaintiff is disadvantaged to responding to such Counterclaims not knowing the actual bases for each " Counterclaim."
In addition, a counterclaim to a foreclosure action must relate to the making, validity or enforcement of the note or mortgage in order properly to be joined with the complaint. New Haven Savings Bank v. LaPlace, 66 Conn.App. 1, 9-11. The defendants’ Counterclaims do not pertain to the making, validity or enforcement of the note or mortgage.
The plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Counterclaims is granted. The defendants’ motion in opposition is overruled.