Connex Credit Union v. Madgic (2026)

Holding

After a credit union repossessed and sold a Nissan Rogue, borrowers counterclaimed for deficient pre/post-repossession and sale notices under §§ 42a-9-625 and 36a-785. On April 28, 2026, the Supreme Court reversed summary judgment based on the one-year penal-statute period. The remedies are compensatory/remedial despite deterrent features. Full court-authored opinion, part I A.

Because these particular duties arose from statute, the court borrowed § 52-577’s three-year act-or-omission period, not Article 2’s four-year contract period. It expressly distinguished ulbrich-v-groth-2013. Actual timeliness, pandemic tolling and class issues remained for remand. Full opinion, parts I B–II and disposition.

Limits

The decision does not adjudicate a purchaser’s title, rescind the sale, establish actual notice violations, or prescribe one period for every Article 9 claim. The opinion body controls over typographical statute-number errors in its syllabus. Full sixteen-page primary text retrieved October 17, 2026; later treatment not comprehensively certified. See connecticut, motor-vehicles.

Bounded final review (2026-10-18)

Full slip opinion retrieved 2026-10-18 from the Judicial Branch (CR354.31); cases.justia.com is no longer relied on. Comprehensive later treatment remains needs_verification; no citator certification is made.

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify the cited sources before acting.