Delahunty v. Targonski, 158 Conn.App. 741

Plaintiff Delahunty owned land on Indian Hill Road, Haddam, with two subdivided lots (lot1 and lot2) and an access strip between them that fronts Indian Hill Road.
In 2004, Delahunty sold lot2 to defendants Agnes and Kizyszlof Targonski; the warranty deed did not grant a right-of-way or easement over the access strip.
Defendants believed a right-of-way would be in the deed and, after closing, did not know the deed lacked such a right.
Defendants built a house, later required a setback adjustment, and Delahunty conveyed a small portion of the access strip on August 25, 2005; a stone wall and paved driveway were constructed in 2005–2007.
Delahunty sued in 2008 for trespass, nuisance, and quiet title; the action included claims about the stone wall, the driveway, trees, vehicle parking, and other interference with her property; a third-party device (Gaffeys) was joined and later tried separately in court.
The trial court, in 2014, found an easement by estoppel for ingress/egress on the paved portion of the access strip, trespass related to the wall and trees, and nominal damages of $100; nuisance and other damages were denied; post-trial, Delahunty claimed a jury trial right that was unpreserved.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Delahunty waived her right to a jury trial.	Delahunty contends Golding requires review for unpreserved claims.	Defendants contend waiver occurred through conduct and consent to nonjury trial.	Waived right to jury trial; Golding prong satisfied.
Whether Golding applies to civil cases and supports waiver analysis.	Golding should permit review of unpreserved claims.	Civil context allows waiver under L&R Realty and related authorities.	Golding applicable; waiver found.
Whether the record shows a timely objection or acquiescence to a court trial.	No timely objection was raised to the absence of a jury.	Plaintiff appeared and participated without objection; implied waiver.	No timely objection; implied waiver; third prong of Golding satisfied.

State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (Conn. 1989) (establishes Golding standard for preserved/unpreserved claims)
Keating v. Glass Container Corp., 197 Conn. 428 (Conn. 1985) (timeliness and objecting to trial type; pivotal to waiver analysis)
L&R Realty v. Connecticut National Bank, 246 Conn. 1 (Conn. 1998) (civil contract waivers; different standard from criminal waivers)
In re Yasiel R., 151 Conn. App. 710 (Conn. App. 2014) (applies Golding to civil context as appropriate)
State v. Fabricatore, 281 Conn. 469 (Conn. 2007) (waiver/Golding discussion in civil context)