JACK W. FISCHER, Judge.
In this case, the plaintiff, Midland Funding LLC (Midland) alleges that the defendant, Sharon Hale became indebted to Emerge Mastercard, in the sum of $11,481.76, that Midland purchased title to this debt and that the debt remains unpaid. Midland has now moved for summary judgment. The defendant, who originally represented herself, has now retained an attorney and objects to said motion but also moves for summary judgment in the defendant's favor.
The plaintiff also claims that because its request for admissions, interrogatories and requests for production were served on the defendant on December 5, 2008, and it did not receive a response within the period allowed under the Practice Book, the requests for admission should be deemed admitted. This court declines to do so. The defendant did file her response on January 16, 2008, and appears to have at least made a request for an extension of time to file them before January 5, 2009.
Both motions for summary judgment are denied.
"Practice Book § 17-49 provides that summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, affidavits and any other proof submitted show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the trial court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Provencher v. Enfield, 284 Conn. 772, 790-91, 936 A.2d 625 (2007). "In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the court's function is not to decide issues of material fact, but rather to determine whether any such issues exist." Nolan v. Borkowski, 206 Conn. 495, 500, 538 A.2d 1031 (1988). "[T]he `genuine issue' aspect of summary judgment requires the parties to bring forward before trial evidentiary facts, or substantial evidence outside the pleadings, from which the material facts alleged in the pleadings can warrantably be inferred . . . A material fact has been defined adequately and simply as a fact which will make a difference in the result of the case." (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Buell Industries, Inc. v. Greater New York Mutual Ins. Co., 259 Conn. 527, 556, 791 A.2d 489 (2002).
"The party seeking summary judgment has the burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue [of] material facts which, under applicable principles of substantive law, entitle him to a judgment as a matter of CT Page 7389 law . . . and the party opposing such a motion must provide an evidentiary foundation to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material fact . . ." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Hertz Corp. v. Federal Ins. Co., 245 Conn. 374, 381, 713 A.2d 820 (1998).
Although the plaintiff claims that it purchased the debt from Emerge Mastercard, it has submitted a document which purports to be an assignment from Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC to Midland without further explanation or documentation. Thus, there remains a material question as to the chain of title of the debt. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied.
The defendant's motion for summary judgment is also denied, as she has provided essentially nothing more than an argument as to why the plaintiff's motion should not be granted.