The mission of the Connecticut Judicial Branch is to serve the interests of justice and the public by resolving matters brought before it in a fair, timely, efficient and open manner.
Recent Opinions

Criminal Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6081

AC47303 - State v. Sinchak (Motion to correct illegal sentence; subject matter jurisdiction; denial of state’s motion for permission to appeal because defendant had not yet been resentenced; “The defendant moved to dismiss the appeal because it is not from a final judgment. The state claims that the orders are immediately appealable. We disagree with the state and, therefore, we have granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6080

AC46675 - Martinez v. Commissioner of Correction (“As acknowledged by the petitioner’s counsel during oral argument before this court, the petitioner’s appeal exclusively challenges the habeas court’s credibility determinations concerning the testimony during the habeas trial given by Attorney Jerome Larracuente and the petitioner. However, a habeas court’s ‘pure credibility determination . . . is unassailable.’ Breton v. Commissioner of Correction, 325 Conn. 640, 694, 159 A.3d 1112 (2017); see also Sanchez v. Commissioner of Correction, 314 Conn. 585, 604, 103 A.3d 954 (2014) (‘we must defer to the [trier of fact’s] assessment of the credibility of the witnesses based on its firsthand observation of their conduct, demeanor and attitude’ (internal quotation marks omitted)). Accordingly, we dismiss the petitioner’s appeal.”)


Family Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Greenlee, Rebecca

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6082

AC 46365 - Thomas v. Cleary ("In this custody matter, the self-represented defendant, Meghan M. Cleary, appeals from the judgment of the trial court adjudicating several postjudgment motions. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) granted a postjudgment motion for modification of custody brought by the plaintiff, Kenneth L. Thomas, (2) ‘‘displayed consistent bias’’ against her, and (3) found that she had an imputed earning capacity of $90,000. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")


Foreclosure Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Greenlee, Rebecca

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6079

AC 47040 - Retained Realty, Inc. v. Selke ("On September 17, 2024, this court ordered that the parties, the plaintiff, Retained Realty, Inc., and the defendant Christopher A. Selke, file supplemental memoranda addressing whether the defendant’s appeal from the trial court’s judgment of foreclosure by sale of the defendant’s property should be dismissed as moot where, after the trial court terminated the appellate stay, it approved the committee’s sale of the property on April 5, 2024, which extinguished the defendant’s right of redemption, and, thereafter, title to the property vested in the successful bidder. See U.S. Bank, National Assn. v. Fitzpatrick, 206 Conn. App. 509, 514–15, 260 A.3d 1240 (2021); Connecticut Savings Bank v. Howes, 9 Conn. App. 446, 447–48, 519 A.2d 1216 (1987). Neither party filed a response to this order. After a careful review of the record, briefs, and appendices on file, we have determined that this appeal is moot. See, e.g., BNY Western Trust v. Roman, 102 Conn. App. 265, 266–67, 926 A.2d 36 (after sale is approved and relevant appeal periods have expired, any action by mortgagor to redeem should be dismissed as moot), cert. denied, 284 Conn. 935, 937 A.2d 693 (2007). The appeal is dismissed ")


Juvenile Law Appellate Court Slip Opinion

   by Greenlee, Rebecca

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6078

AC 47517 - In re S. F. ("The respondent father, Perry F., appeals from the judgments of the trial court, rendered in favor of the petitioner, the Commissioner of Children and Families, terminating his parental rights with respect to his children, A, B, and C. On appeal, the respondent claims that he was denied his due process right to the effective assistance of counsel. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.")


Administrative Appeal Supreme Court Opinion

   by Berardino, Emily

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6077

SC20795 - United Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities Regulatory Authority ("In this appeal, the plaintiff, The United Illuminating Company, appeals from the judgments of the Superior Court dismissing its consolidated administrative appeals from two final decisions of the defendant, the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA). The plaintiff challenges PURA's determination that the plaintiff had violated its statutory obligations with respect to its emergency planning, storm recovery performance, and other actions taken in August, 2020, in connection with Tropical Storm Isaias and its aftermath. The plaintiff further contends that PURA improperly reduced the plaintiff's authorized return on equity (ROE) and imposed various civil penalties, including more than $1.2 million in fines. We conclude that the plaintiff's challenge to the ROE reduction is moot, insofar as the reduction was never implemented. We also conclude that PURA miscalculated the fines it imposed for the plaintiff's delayed reporting of two minor accidents. Otherwise, we find no error and thus affirm the trial court's judgments in all other respects.")


Connecticut Law Journal - October 29, 2024

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6075

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVI, No. 18, for October 29, 2024 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 350: Connecticut Reports (Pages 251 - 346)
  • Volume 350: Orders (Pages 907 - 910)
  • Volume 350: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 228: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 803 - 868)
  • Volume 228: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 906 - 907)
  • Volume 228: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Miscellaneous Notices


Employment Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Oumano, Emily

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6074

AC46677 - Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Travelers Indemnity Co. (“These two appeals, although not consolidated, involve closely related claims. In Docket No. AC 46677, the plaintiff, the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO), appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing its administrative appeal brought against the defendant Travelers Indemnity Company (Travelers). The plaintiff claims that the trial court erred in concluding that Travelers had not engaged in age discrimination per se, in violation of General Statutes § 46a-60 (b) (6), by means of posting a job advertisement that contained the phrase ‘‘recent college graduate.’’ In Docket No. AC 46678, the CHRO appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing its administrative appeal brought against the defendant Yale University (Yale). The plaintiff claims that the court erred in rejecting its claim that Yale had engaged in age discrimination per se, in violation of § 46a-60 (b) (6), by means of posting a job advertisement that contained the phrase ‘‘recent graduate.’’ We affirm the judgments of the trial court.”)


Criminal Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Oumano, Emily

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6073

AC46030 - State v. Vickers (“The defendant, Kenyal Vickers, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of two counts of sexual assault in the fourth degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-73a (a) (2), two counts of breach of the peace in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-181 (a) (2), and failure to appear in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-172 (a) (1). On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court (1) improperly denied his motion for severance of the charges as to two separate victims, and (2) committed plain error in failing to instruct the jury, sua sponte, on the proper use of the evidence following the denial of his motion for severance. We are not persuaded and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the trial court.”)


Attorney Discipline Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6072

AC46607 - Mills v. Statewide Grievance Committee ("The plaintiff attorney, John W. Mills, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing his appeal from the decision of the defendant, the Statewide Grievance Committee (committee). The committee reprimanded the plaintiff after finding that he had filed a motion containing statements that violated rules 8.2 (a) and 8.4 (4) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. The plaintiff claims on appeal that the court improperly dismissed his appeal because (1) the reviewing committee of the Statewide Grievance Committee (reviewing committee) applied the wrong test for determining whether he made statements knowing them to be false or with reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity, (2) the record does not provide clear and convincing evidence that his statements violated rule 8.2 (a), and (3) the committee abused its discretion by reprimanding the plaintiff. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the court.")


Connecticut Law Journal - October 22, 2024

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6070

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVI, No. 17, for October 22, 2024 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 350: Connecticut Reports (Pages 119 - 251)
  • Volume 350: Orders (Pages 903 - 907)
  • Volume 350: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 228: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 750 - 803)
  • Volume 228: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 905 - 905)
  • Volume 228: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Notices of Connecticut State Agencies


Tort Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6069

AC45829 - Mulvihill v. Spinnato ("The defendant, Kara Spinnato, known also as Kara Callahan, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying her special motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Connecticut's anti-SLAPP statute, General Statutes § 52-196a, in this defamation action brought by the self-represented plaintiff, Daniel Mulvihill. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly concluded that the plaintiff met his burden under § 52-196a of establishing probable cause that he will prevail on the merits of his complaint. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")


Family Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Greenlee, Rebecca

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6068

AC 46271 - Kosar v. Giangrande ("In this dissolution action, the defendant, Marie Giangrande, appeals following the trial court’s judgment dissolving her marriage to the plaintiff, Jaromir Kosar, and the trial court’s order on the plaintiff’s amended motion for contempt and injunctive relief. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court, Hon. Michael E. Shay, judge trial referee, (1) abused its discretion and deprived her of due process of law by limiting her case-in-chief on the plaintiff’s pendente lite amended motion for contempt and motion for injunctive relief to only fifteen minutes and (2) abused its discretion in refusing to hear her motion to open the parties’ pendente lite agreement regarding the marital home. She also claims that the court, Moukawsher, J. (3) committed plain error by presiding over the parties’ dissolution trial after conducting a hearing on the motion of the defendant’s then counsel to withdraw his appearance and (4) made credibility determinations on improper bases. We agree with the defendant on her first claim but disagree with her on her other claims. Accordingly, we reverse in part and affirm in part the judgment of the trial court.")


Connecticut Law Journal - October 15, 2024

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6066

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVI, No. 16, for October 15, 2024 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 350: Connecticut Reports (Pages 1 - 118)
  • Volume 350: Orders (Pages 901 - 903)
  • Volume 350: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 228: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 593 - 748)
  • Volume 228: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 904 - 904)
  • Volume 228: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Miscellaneous Notices
  • Notices of Connecticut State Agencies


Contract Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Oumano, Emily

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6065

AC46370 - Sicignano v. Pearce (“The plaintiff, Robert J. Sicignano, Jr., appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing his complaint against the defendants, Barbara Pearce and Connecticut Hospice, Inc. (Connecticut Hospice), pursuant to Connecticut’s anti-SLAPP statute, General Statutes § 52-196a. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the trial court erred by: (1) ‘concluding [that] the plaintiff’s claims against the defendants fall within the ambit of protected constitutional conduct as defined by . . .§ 52-196a’; (2) ‘adopting language in the California anti-SLAPP statute and California case law not contained in the Connecticut anti-SLAPP statute in violation of the separation of powers under the constitution’; and (3) ‘adopting definitions of language in the Connecticut anti-SLAPP statute based upon California case law [interpreting] the California statute in violation of the rule against ex post facto legislation as applied to the courts through the due process clause.’ We affirm the judgment of the trial court.”)


Business Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Oumano, Emily

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6064

AC46348 - Rubin v. Brodie (“We agree with the plaintiffs’ first claim and conclude specifically that the court improperly determined that the individual plaintiffs lacked standing to maintain a derivative action to enforce the rights of the plaintiff LLCs in light of the court’s conclusion that their complaint sufficiently alleged demand futility. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s judgment dismissing, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the individual plaintiffs’ derivative action. We disagree with the plaintiffs’ second and third claims and therefore affirm the trial court’s judgment dismissing, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the plaintiff LLCs’ and the individual plaintiffs’ direct actions. We decline to review the plaintiffs’ fourth claim.”)


Criminal Law Appellate Court Opinions

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6063

AC45493 - State v. Greene-Pendergrass (Violation of probation; “The issue presented in this appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking the probation of the defendant, Marque Greene-Pendergrass, and sentencing him to five years of incarceration. We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion and, accordingly, affirm the judgments of the trial court.”)

AC46775 - State v. Maurice B. (“On appeal, the defendant claims that the prosecutor committed prosecutorial impropriety and deprived him of a fair trial when the prosecutor made certain improper statements during the state’s rebuttal closing argument. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6062

AC46910 - Johnson v. Commissioner of Correction (“On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal; (2) improperly concluded that he failed to establish that his trial counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient; and (3) improperly concluded that he was not prejudiced by his trial counsel’s deficient performance in the underlying criminal proceeding. We disagree and dismiss the appeal.”)


Landlord/Tenant Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Zigadto, Janet

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6061

AC46290 - Milford Redevelopment & Housing Partnership v. Glicklin ("In this summary process action, the plaintiff, Milford Redevelopment & Housing Partnership, appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendant, Lisa Glicklin. The plaintiff initiated this summary process action against the defendant claiming that the defendant repeatedly violated the plaintiff's smoke-free housing policy. In rendering judgment for the defendant, the trial court rejected the plaintiff's claim on the basis that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant had not cured the violation of the plaintiff's policy. On appeal, the plaintiff raises interrelated claims. First, it claims that the court improperly raised sua sponte the unpleaded special defense of cure to defeat its summary process action. Second, it claims that, even if it was proper for the court to raise the special defense of cure sua sponte, the court improperly placed the burden on the plaintiff to prove that the defendant did not cure her violations. The defendant, in addition to disputing the plaintiff's claims, argues that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action because of alleged inadequacies in the pretermination notice provided to the defendant. For the reasons that follow, we reject the defendant's jurisdictional argument and agree with the plaintiff that the court improperly rendered judgment in favor of the defendant. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the court.")


Connecticut Law Journal - October 8, 2024

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=6059

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVI, No. 15, for October 8, 2024 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 349: Connecticut Reports (Pages 783 - 845)
  • Volume 349: Orders (Pages 924 - 924)
  • Volume 349: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 228: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 444 - 593)
  • Volume 228: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 904 - 904)
  • Volume 228: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Miscellaneous Notices
  • Notices of Connecticut State Agencies