Carmon v. Commissioner of Correction, 148 Conn. App. 780

Carmon, a petitioner, filed his third habeas petition after prior petitions failed.
Respondent Commissioner of Correction sought default and judgment for failure to plead after two requests for a more specific statement.
Court granted default on July 30, 2012, but gave petitioner time to respond to the more specific statement; petitioner did respond with an amended pleading attempt, which the court did not accept as proper.
August 24, 2012, the court rendered a default judgment and dismissed the habeas petition; notice mailed August 31, 2012.
Petitioner sought certiorari to appeal from the default judgment; respondent challenged the appeal as improper or untimely, but the petition for certification was ultimately granted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Authority to render default without a pending motion	Carmon contends no viable motion supported default.	Commissioner argues §52-119 and Practice Book §10-18 authorize default regardless of pending motion.	Court had authority to render default.
Whether court properly opened or should have opened the default	Petitioner says court opened default improperly based on pleading status.	Commissioner contends timely compliance failed; proper conditional opening occurred.	Court did not abuse discretion; default properly justified.
Adequacy of notice and opportunities to cure	Petitioner argues inadequate opportunity to correct pleadings.	Respondent notes prior notices and court orders provided chances to comply.	Interests of justice do not require reversal.

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Bertrand, 140 Conn. App. 646 (Conn. App. 2013) (court may enter default to maintain orderly procedure; no need for pending motion)
Segretario v. Stewart-Warner Corp., 9 Conn. App. 355 (Conn. App. 1986) (nonsuit vs. default distinction; guidance on default mechanics)