Carmichael v. Stonkus
2012 WL 224899
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Foreclosure action filed in 2004 against Carmichael Brushie and Stonkus over a note secured by real property.
- Carmichael Brushie filed a cross complaint (2005) asserting fraud, conversion, statutory theft, fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment and emotional distress and seeking to quiet title.
- Trial court severed the cross complaint from the foreclosure action and scheduled separate trials; foreclosure trial began May 11, 2010; cross complaint trial began April 28, 2010.
- Defendant appealed the severance order, arguing it harmed judicial economy and his appeal rights.
- Trial evidence: jury returned for Carmichael Brushie on fraud, conversion, and statutory theft; court found for Brushie on quiet title; appeal followed.
- Record insufficient for meaningful review due to lack of hearing transcript and inadequate briefing; appellate court declined review on both issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court abused its discretion in severing the cross complaint. | Brushie | Stonkus | No review due to inadequate record; no abuse shown. |
| Whether the severance impeded appellant's appeal rights. | Brushie | Stonkus | Not reviewable; briefing deficiencies. |
| Whether the record and briefing were adequate for appellate review. | Brushie | Stonkus | Record inadequate; briefs inadequately briefed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sinnott v. Sinnott, 44 Conn.App. 153 (1997) (review requires adequate record for severance issue)
- Russell v. Russell, 91 Conn.App. 619 (2005) (claims not reviewed without law and analysis)
- Paoletta v. Anchor Reef Club at Branford, LLC., 123 Conn. App. 402 (2010) (lack of standard of review and analysis)
- Label Systems Corp. v. Aghamohammadi, 270 Conn. 291 (2004) (noncompliance with § 67-4 deemed basis to deny review)
- Alpha Crane Service, Inc. v. Capitol Crane Co., 6 Conn.App. 60 (1986) (discretion to sever actions is reviewed for abuse)