U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Jackson

── U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Jackson ── Court: Connecticut Appellate Court Date: June 02, 2026 Author: Cradle Category: General ************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecti- cut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying an opinion that appear in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced or distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ************************************************  U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Jackson U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, TRUSTEE v. GARLAND JACKSON ET AL. (AC 48595) Cradle, C. J., and Moll and Westbrook, Js. Syllabus The defendant property owner appealed from the trial court’s judgment of foreclosure by sale rendered for the plaintiff. He claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly denied his motion for summary judgment predicated on his contention that the plaintiff failed to provide him with an Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program (EMAP) notice required pursuant to statutes (§§ 8-265dd and 8-265ee). Held: The trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion for summary judg- ment on the basis of its conclusion that the plaintiff provided an EMAP notice to the defendant in accordance with § 8-265dd, as notice is given for purposes of § 8-265dd (b) when the notice provisions of § 8-265ee are met, and the notice provisions of § 8-265ee (a) do not require delivery of an EMAP notice but, rather, a plaintiff need only demonstrate that the EMAP notice was mailed as directed in § 8-265ee (a). The trial court properly granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to liability only, as, after the plaintiff met its initial burden to demonstrate the lack of a genuine issue of material fact that it owned the note, the burden shifted to the defendant to establish the existence of such an issue, and the defendant failed to produce any evidence to satisfy that burden. Argued February 2—officially released June 2, 2026 Procedural History Action to foreclose a mortgage on certain real property owned by the named defendant, and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Haven, where the defendant United States Depart- ment of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, was defaulted for failure to appear and the defendant Depart- ment of Revenue Services was defaulted for failure to plead; thereafter, the court, Stone, J., granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to liability only and denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment; subsequently, the court, Stone, J., rendered judgment of foreclosure by sale, from which the named defendant appealed to this court. Affirmed. Christopher G. Brown, for the appellant (named defen- dant).  U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Jackson Benjamin T. Staskiewicz, for the appellee (plaintiff). Opinion MOLL, J. The defendant Garland Jackson,