204 Conn.App. 526
Conn. App. Ct.2021Background
- Plaintiff alleges she was struck and injured when a Gates in New Canaan employee forcefully opened a restaurant restroom door.
- Writ of summons and complaint was served on the defendant’s registered agent on June 18, 2019; defendant did not file an appearance.
- Plaintiff moved for default; clerk entered default on August 6, 2019; after an evidentiary hearing on damages the court entered a $1,000,000 judgment on January 9, 2020.
- Defendant filed an appearance and a motion to open the judgment on March 20, 2020, claiming it mistakenly believed its insurance broker would notify the insurer and secure counsel; insurer was not notified until after judgment.
- Trial court denied the motion to open, concluding the defendant’s inaction was negligence (not "mistake, accident or other reasonable cause") and that the defendant had not pleaded a bona fide defense.
- Defendant moved to reargue; court granted reargument, reconsidered on the papers, reaffirmed denial without a hearing, and defendant appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion to open under § 52-212 | Disturco: defendant had notice and its failure to appear was negligence, not reasonable cause; no basis to open judgment | Gates: forwarding process to insurance broker and believing the broker would notify insurer was a reasonable mistake; insurer’s late notice prevented defense | Affirmed: court did not abuse discretion; forwarding to broker was negligence, not reasonable cause; defendant also failed to articulate a bona fide defense |
| Whether defendant was entitled to a hearing after the court granted its motion to reargue (Practice Book § 11-12(c)) | Disturco: § 11-12(d) makes § 11-12 inapplicable to final judgments; therefore no mandatory hearing | Gates: § 11-12(c) entitles movant to a hearing once reargument is granted | Affirmed: § 11-12 does not apply to motions to reargue final judgments; § 11-11 governs and does not require a hearing on granting reargument |
Key Cases Cited
- Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. Buchman, 328 Conn. 586 (2018) (statutory and rules interpretation reviewed plenarily)
- Multilingual Consultant Assocs., LLC v. Ngoh, 163 Conn. App. 725 (2016) (two‑part test for opening default judgments under Practice Book §17‑43 and §52‑212)
- Postemski v. Landon, 9 Conn. App. 320 (1986) (negligence insufficient to establish reasonable cause to open default judgment)
- Testa v. Carrolls Hamburger Sys., Inc., 154 Conn. 294 (1966) (§52‑212 is remedial but does not permit relief where defendant had notice and failed to act)
- Gibbs v. Spinner, 103 Conn. App. 502 (2007) (denial of motion to open is an appealable final judgment)
- National Groups, LLC v. Nardi, 145 Conn. App. 189 (2013) (notice to agent imputed to principal)