Unifund CCR Partners v. Schaeppi, 59 A.3d 282

Unifund CCR Partners sued Ellen A. Schaeppi and Ernest A. Schaeppi on a credit card debt.
Attorney fact finder recommended judgment for the defendants; plaintiff objected and the court remanded for rehearing.
On June 19, 2006 the court entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, stating it would enter on the fact finder’s revised report.
A judgment lien was placed on the defendants’ real property in July 2006; weekly installment payments were ordered in September 2006.
In 2007–2008 the court denied plaintiff’s partial summary judgment; it found the underlying money amount and entry were problematic.
In 2011 the plaintiff sought to open and modify the 2006 judgment; the court and appellate court held there was no valid judgment to open.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 2006 judgment was a valid, final money judgment	Schaeppi: amount ascertainable from record; judgment final	Schaeppi: judgment not a full final money judgment	No valid final money judgment entered
Whether the installment payment order can serve as a money judgment or basis to open	Installment order could substitute for money judgment	Installment order is not a money judgment	Installment order not a judgment subject to opening
Whether the court should exercise supervisory powers to modify or remand	Court should modify to include precise amount or remand for amount	Supervisory powers reserved for extraordinary cases	Court declined to exercise supervisory powers

Ballou v. Law Offices Howard Lee Schiff, P.C., 304 Conn. 348 (2012) (distinct meanings for installment order vs money judgment)
State v. Connor, 292 Conn. 483 (2009) (supervisory powers and fair administration of justice)
State v. Ouellette, 271 Conn. 740 (2004) (supervisory powers related to fair administration)
Eremita v. Morello, 111 Conn. App. 103 (2008) (standards for reviewing denial of motion to open judgment)