224 Conn.App. 867
Conn. App. Ct.2024Background
- U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., obtained ownership of the property after a strict foreclosure action when the law day passed, but the defendant (Healey family) continued residing there.
- The bank initiated a summary process eviction, serving a notice to quit on the adult defendants and one adult daughter. The son, Connor, was not served as he was a minor at the time.
- The trial court granted judgment of possession to U.S. Bank, which the defendants appealed and lost; the judgment was affirmed on appeal.
- After Connor turned 18 (thus becoming an adult resident never served a notice to quit), the defendants filed a motion to open and dismiss, arguing the judgment became invalid for lack of notice to Connor.
- The trial court denied their motion, finding the original notice valid and that Connor's later majority status did not invalidate earlier service.
- The defendants appealed again, challenging the process on the grounds of lack of notice to an adult occupant (Connor).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was notice to quit properly served on all adults? | Notice was correctly served on adults as required. | Notice was defective because Connor, now an adult, was never served. | Notice was properly served; Connor was a minor at service. |
| Does Connor’s turning 18 invalidate the judgment? | No effect; status determined at time of original service. | Judgment is invalid because Connor, now an adult, never received notice. | Judgment remains valid; no retroactive defect. |
| Do defendants have standing/aggrievement to appeal? | Defendants aren’t personally aggrieved; issue is Connor’s right. | Defendants claim harm due to potential unlawful dispossession. | Defendants are not aggrieved; claim is about Connor only. |
| Can statutory aggrievement be based on nonparty rights? | Statute does not confer relief where notice as to themselves is undisputed. | Argued they are within the statutory zone of interest due to occupancy. | No statutory aggrievement where claim concerns only Connor. |
Key Cases Cited
- U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Healey, 208 Conn. App. 903 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021) (affirmed prior judgment of possession in the same property)
- St. Paul’s Flax Hill Co-operative v. Johnson, 124 Conn. App. 728 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010) (discussed standing to raise rights of nonparties)
- M.U.N. Capital, LLC v. National Hall Properties, LLC, 163 Conn. App. 372 (Conn. App. Ct. 2016) (jurisdiction and aggrievement requirements for appeal)
- Marine Midland Bank v. Ahern, 51 Conn. App. 790 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999) (aggrievement is appellate standing)
- Fort Trumbull Conservancy, LLC v. Alves, 262 Conn. 480 (Conn. 2003) (distinguishing statutory aggrievement)