197 Conn.App. 147
Conn. App. Ct.2020Background
- Minor plaintiff Victor Harris was injured on defendants’ property in Oct. 2014; suit filed Oct. 15, 2016 by his mother Andrea Hill as next friend and co-plaintiff.
- Scheduling and discovery orders required Harris to sit for a deposition and produce records; plaintiffs repeatedly failed to comply and depositions were renoticed and missed.
- Plaintiffs’ counsel (Cirello) withdrew in January 2018 due to an internal conflict between Harris and Hill; Hill later withdrew as a plaintiff in April 2018.
- Probate proceedings led to appointment of a temporary custodian (Mildred Mutape) in March 2018; by the May 24, 2018 trial date Harris had no counsel or next friend and did not appear.
- Trial court dismissed the case for nonappearance under Practice Book § 14-3; Harris filed a motion to open the dismissal in Sept. 2018 arguing reasonable cause (injuries, family discord, counsel withdrawal, father’s illness).
- Trial court summarily denied the motion to open; the Appellate Court reversed, concluding Harris had shown reasonable cause and directing the trial court to grant the motion to open.
Issues
| Issue | Harris' Argument | Neale/Defendants' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Harris’ motion to open the disciplinary dismissal | Motion to open should be granted because reasonable cause prevented timely prosecution (severe injuries, major neurocognitive disorder, family breakdown, counsel and next-friend issues) | Denial proper: Harris was negligent, failed discovery and deposition obligations, and delayed months after counsel/next-friend withdrawals | Court abused its discretion; appellate court reversed and directed the trial court to open the judgment |
| Whether Harris established reasonable cause / existence of good cause of action to reopen the dismissal | A viable negligence/premises-liability claim existed and the record showed circumstances beyond Harris’ control that prevented prosecution | Argues prior discovery abuses and delays show the problems were Harris’ own doing; defendants relied on cases denying relief for discovery defaults | Harris satisfied both: a viable cause of action existed and reasonable cause (minor status, neurocognitive disorder, familial/guardian disruption) prevented prosecution |
Key Cases Cited
- Bank of New York Mellon v. Horsey, 182 Conn. App. 417 (Conn. App. 2018) (motion to open disciplinary dismissal governed by § 52-212/Practice Book § 17-43 and reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Multilingual Consultant Associates, LLC v. Ngoh, 163 Conn. App. 725 (Conn. App. 2016) (discretion must be exercised to favor trial on the merits)
- Biro v. Hill, 231 Conn. 462 (Conn. 1994) (denial to set aside nonsuit affirmed where plaintiffs failed to show reasonable cause for discovery noncompliance)
- Kung v. Deng, 135 Conn. App. 848 (Conn. App. 2012) (upheld denial to open dismissal where plaintiffs had long delay and failed to comply with discovery orders)
- Jaconski v. AMF, Inc., 208 Conn. 230 (Conn. 1988) (court lacked authority to set aside nonsuit when statutory requirements for reopening were unmet)
- Bridgeport v. Grace Building, LLC, 181 Conn. App. 280 (Conn. App. 2018) (discusses factual review standards and good-cause considerations on motions to open)
- Langewisch v. New England Residential Services, Inc., 113 Conn. App. 290 (Conn. App. 2009) (limits appellate review when motion to open is filed more than twenty days after judgment)