Connecticut National Mortgage Co. v. Knudsen
150 A.3d 675
Conn.2016Background
- Foreclosure action originally filed in 1989 against Knudsen; judgment of foreclosure entered in 1994 and later reopened/modified several times.
- On June 8, 2015, the trial court entered a new judgment of strict foreclosure and set the defendant’s law day (deadline to redeem) as August 4, 2015.
- On June 17, 2015, Knudsen filed a motion for permission to file a motion to vacate; that motion was denied on June 18, 2015.
- Knudsen filed an appeal on June 26, 2015 — within twenty days of the June 8 judgment and within twenty days of the denial of her June 17 motion.
- The Appellate Court sua sponte questioned mootness because title may have vested in the plaintiff on August 4, 2015 if no appellate stay was in effect, and dismissed the appeal as moot on January 13, 2016.
- The Connecticut Supreme Court granted certification and reversed, holding the timely appeal from the June 8, 2015 final judgment triggered an automatic appellate stay that prevented title from vesting.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal was moot because the law day passed and title vested during the appeal | Title vested when law day passed; no automatic stay applied to the denial of the June 17 motion under Practice Book §61‑11(g) so appeal is moot | Appeal was filed within 20 days of the June 8 final judgment, which triggered an automatic stay and prevented title from vesting | Reversed Appellate Court: appeal was not moot because the June 8 judgment was appealed timely and created an automatic stay that persisted on Aug 4, 2015 |
| Whether denial of the June 17 subsequent contested motion generated an automatic appellate stay under Practice Book §61‑11(g) | Denial of the subsequent motion did not trigger an automatic stay per §61‑11(g) absent an affidavit of good cause | Even if denial of the June 17 motion didn’t create a stay, the separate June 8 final judgment did and the appeal was timely as to that judgment | §61‑11(g) does not create a stay on the denial of a repeated motion without the required affidavit, but that did not defeat the stay arising from the timely appeal of the June 8 final judgment |
| Whether filing an appeal within 20 days of a final judgment of strict foreclosure automatically stays enforcement until final determination | Plaintiff argued no stay if appeal was effectively from the later motion denial | Defendant argued the June 8 final judgment is appealable and its timely appeal invokes the automatic stay under Practice Book §61‑11(a) | Held that timely appeal of the June 8 final judgment invoked the automatic stay under §61‑11(a) until final disposition |
Key Cases Cited
- Argent Mortgage Co., LLC v. Huertas, 288 Conn. 568 (2008) (appeal from strict foreclosure becomes moot when law days pass and title vests)
- Citigroup Global Markets Realty Corp. v. Christiansen, 163 Conn. App. 635 (2016) (discussing abuses from serial motions to open judgments and purpose of Practice Book §61‑11(g))
- Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB v. Charles, 95 Conn. App. 315 (2006) (appeal from strict foreclosure can be rendered moot by passage of law days)
- Farmers & Mechanics Savings Bank v. Sullivan, 216 Conn. 341 (1990) (denial of motion to open is an appealable final judgment)