State v. Bacon Construction Co., 15 A.3d 147

Bacon Construction Co., Inc. appealed a trial court ruling overruling its collateral estoppel objection to a prejudgment remedy application by the State of Connecticut.
The prejudgment remedy proceeding involves attachment and other relief prior to final judgment, based on probable cause, not merits.
Arbitration had previously found the contractor performed its obligations; that award was confirmed by the Superior Court and later by this court in a separate appeal.
Plaintiff filed the underlying action and sought a prejudgment remedy; defendant asserted res judicata and collateral estoppel defenses.
The trial court overruled the collateral estoppel objection; defendant appealed to the Appellate Court seeking immediate review.
The court ultimately held that the denial of a collateral estoppel defense in a prejudgment remedy proceeding is not an appealable final judgment, so the appeal is dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether denial of a collateral estoppel defense in a prejudgment remedy is appealable before final judgment.	Bacon argues for immediate appeal under Convalescent Center.	Bacon contends Convalescent Center should be extended to prejudgment remedy.	No; it is not an appealable final judgment.

Convalescent Center of Bloomfield, Inc. v. Dept. of Income Maintenance, 208 Conn. 187 (1988) (allowed immediate appeal from denial of collateral estoppel in administrative context)
State v. Curcio, 191 Conn. 27 (1983) (interlocutory appeals limited to certain circumstances)
State v. Bell, 179 Conn. 98 (1979) (interlocutory appeal principles cited)
Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. Commissioner of Revenue Services, 297 Conn. 640 (2010) (collateral estoppel and judicial economy considerations)
Genovese v. Gallo Wine Merchants, Inc., 226 Conn. 475 (1993) (promotes judicial economy; res judicata and collateral estoppel purposes)
In re Dan Ross, 272 Conn. 663 (2005) (collateral estoppel goals and efficiency)