CT Appellate Court Assignment of Cases

Assignment for Days 2009-10

All calendar assignments are subject to change. This web page will include the latest changes.

Counsel must identify themselves to the Clerk in Court not later than 15 minutes before the scheduled time of argument.

Quick Links

Assignment Archive

Appellate Court Docket

Appellate Court Home

Court Terms

APPELLATE COURT ASSIGNMENT 1st Term, September 2-25, 2009
Wednesday, September 2 Thursday, September 3 Tuesday, September 8 Wednesday, September 9 Thursday, September 10 Friday, September 11 Monday, September 14 Tuesday, September 15	Wednesday, September 16 Thursday, September 17 Monday, September 21 Tuesday, September 22 Wednesday, September 23 Thursday, September 24 Friday, September 25

1. If a case is assigned for full hearing, the time for oral argument is limited to twenty minutes for each side; for the motion calendar, the time is limited to five minutes each side. See P.B. § 70-4.
2. Counsel are urged to provide the Appellate Court with a minimum of 48 hours’ notice in the event an appeal scheduled for full argument is to be withdrawn. See also P.B. §§ 63-9, 85-2, 85-3.
3. Cases are scheduled for a specific time, not necessarily in the order listed. Counsel must identify themselves to the Clerk in the Courtroom at least 15 minutes before the scheduled time of argument.

Counsel must identify themselves to the Clerk in Court not later than 15 minutes before the scheduled time of argument.

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2009

10:00 A.M.

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE PORTIONS OF THIS APPEAL AND THE CROSS APPEAL BY NATIONWIDE HEALTH PROPERTIES, INC. FROM THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER UPON THE PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF A FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO NATIONWIDE HEALTH PROPERTIES, INC., BECAUSE THE APRIL 13, 2009 JUDGMENT DID NOT DISPOSE OF ALL CAUSES OF ACTION IN THE AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO NATIONWIDE HEALTH PROPERTIES, INC. SEE HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY CO. V. ACE AMERICAN REINSURANCE CO., 284 CONN. 744, 752 N.8 (2007); KELLY V. NEW HAVEN, 275 CONN. 580, 594 (2005); PRACTICE BOOK § 61-3.

(1) AC31025
LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY
Amber J. Hines
v.
LEXINGTON HEALTHCARE GROUP, INC., ET AL.
Halloran & Sage
Eagan, Donohue, D’Occhio & Falsey
Polinsky, Santos & Polinsky, LLC
Heidell, Pittoni, Murphy & Bach
Van A. Starkweather
Clayman, Tapper & Baram, LLC
Rubenstein & Sendy, LLC
Law Offices of W. Martyn Philpot, Jr.
Enrico Vaccaro
Martocchio & Oliveira, LLC
Linda S. Kaufman
Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, PC
Joanne Heslin Laverty
Richard F. Tolisano
Tolisano & Danforth, LLC

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE APPEAL FROM THE TRIAL COURT’S DENIAL OF THE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO CORRECT AN ILLEGAL SENTENCE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS MOOT AS A RESULT OF THE TRIAL COURT’S SUBSEQUENT GRANTING OF THE DEFENDANT’S EXPEDITED MOTION TO CORRECT ILLEGAL SENTENCE AND ITS MAY 7, 2009 RESENTENCING OF THE DEFENDANT. SEE STATE V. SMITH, 70 CONN. APP. 393, 395 N.1 (2002); AHNEMAN V. AHNEMAN, 243 CONN. 471, 483-84 (1998).

(2) AC30518
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Office of the Chief State’s Attorney
v.
MICHAEL DALY
Deborah G. Stevenson, Special Public Defender

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL AND THE SELF-REPRESENTED PARTY ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS IMPROPER BECAUSE (1) THE SOLE REMEDY FOR REVIEW OF A STAY ORDER IS BY MOTION FOR REVIEW UNDER PRACTICE BOOK § 66-6. SEE PRACTICE BOOK § 61-14; EAST HARTFORD HOUSING AUTHORITY V. MORALES, 67 CONN. APP. 139, 140-141 (2001); SANTORO V. SANTORO, 33 CONN. APP. 839, 841 (1994); AND (2) THERE IS NO PRACTICAL RELIEF THAT CAN BE AFFORDED AS THE APPEAL THAT GAVE RISE TO THE STAY HAS BEEN DISMISSED. SEE PRACTICE BOOK § 61-11(a).

(3) AC31095
HAMID NIKOUKARI
Law Offices of Michael J. Auger
v.
BIJAN BAHRAMIAN
Bijan Bahramian, self-represented party

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTERS, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THESE APPEALS FROM THE TRIAL COURT’S CONSOLIDATION ORDERS SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF A FINAL JUDGMENT. SEE STATE V. CURCIO, 191 CONN. 27, 31-33 (1983).

(4) AC31072
DJFM PROPERTIES, LLC
Robert J. Cartoceti
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTA, N.A., ET AL.
Law Office of Martha Croog, LLC
Law Office of Jonathan J. Einhorn
Paul M. Kaplan

AC31140
WELLS FARGO BANK N.A., AS TRUSTEE
Law Offices of Martha Croog, LLC
v.
FRANK STACK ET AL.
Law Offices of Jonathan J. Einhorn

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THIS APPEAL FROM THE TRIAL COURT’S RULING DENYING THE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO IMPLEAD TOWERS GOLDE, LLC, AS A THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF A FINAL JUDGMENT. SEE GUTHRIE V. HARTFORD NATIONAL BANK & TRUST CO., 146 CONN. 741, 742 (1959); SEE ALSO STATE V. CURCIO, 191 CONN. 27, 31 (1983).

(5) AC31173
NYISHA RIVERA, PPA JOAN MORALES
James O. Gaston
v.
TOWN OF BEACON FALLS
Gordon, Muir & Foley, LLP
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE DEFENDANT’S APPEAL FROM THE TRIAL COURT’S JULY 14, 2004 RULING TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING HER FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS MOOT BECAUSE DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE APPEAL, THE DEFENDANT VOLUNTARILY RESIGNED FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW AND PERMANENTLY WAIVED HER RIGHT TO SEEK REINSTATEMENT. SEE PRIVATE HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC. V. TORRES, 278 CONN. 291, 298-300 (2006); COMPARE STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE V. WHITNEY, 227 CONN. 829, 837-38 N.13 (1993). COUNSEL ARE ALSO ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE DEFENDANT’S AMENDED APPEAL FROM THE TRIAL COURT’S NOVEMBER, 2004 ORDERS DIRECTING HER TO RETURN CERTAIN FUNDS AND TO PAY ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS TO THE TRUSTEE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS MOOT BECAUSE DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE AMENDED APPEAL, THE DEFENDANT WAS DISCHARGED OF HER DEBTS IN BANKRUPTCY COURT. SEE D’AURIA V. SOLOMINE, 107 CONN. APP. 711, 715-17 (2008).

(6) AC25674
STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE
Statewide Bar Counsel
v.
SHERI PAIGE
Brandner & Ponzini
Roy S. Ward

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE DEFENDANTS’ APPEAL FROM THE GRANTING OF THE PREJUDGMENT REMEDY SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE APPEAL WAS NOT TAKEN WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF THE JUDGMENT. SEE GENERAL STATUTES § 52-278l; SEE ALSO AMBROISE V. WILLIAM RAVEIS REAL ESTATE, INC., 226 CONN. 757, 765-67 (1993); GAGNE V. VACCARO, 80 CONN. APP. 436, 454 (2003), CERT. DENIED, 268 CONN. 920 (2004).

(7) AC30993
SANTA FUEL, INC.
Green & Gross, P.C.
v.
CASCELLA & SON CONSTRUCTION, INC., ET AL.
Juda Epstein

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THIS WRIT OF ERROR SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS PROCEDURALLY IMPROPER BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, AS A PARTY TO THE UNDERLYING ACTION, CANNOT SEEK REVIEW BY WRIT OF ERROR; SEE GREEN ROCK RIDGE, INC. V. KOBERNAT, 250 CONN. 488, 490 N.2 (1999); STATE V. MARRO, 68 CONN. APP. 849, 854 (2002); AND BECAUSE THE WRIT WAS NOT BROUGHT FROM A FINAL JUDGMENT. SEE PRACTICE BOOK § 72-1 (A); STATE V. CURCIO, 191 CONN. 27, 31 (1983).

(8) AC31169
CORLISS J. UCCI
Law Offices of Michael Ruben Peck
Geraldine Ficarra
v.
WALTER R. UCCI
Phillip Miller, Assistant Attorney General
Gersten, Clifford & Rome, LLP

IN THE FOLLOWING MATTERS, COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AND GIVE REASONS, IF ANY, WHY THE APPEALS SHOULD NOT BE DISPOSED OF, PRACTICE BOOK § 85-1, AND WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED, PRACTICE BOOK § 85-2, FOR FAILURE TO FILE THE DOCUMENTS LISTED OR TO PURSUE THE APPEAL WITH DILIGENCE. FAILURE TO APPEAR AT THIS HEARING AS ORDERED WILL SUBJECT COUNSEL AND SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES TO THE IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, MONETARY SANCTIONS, FINES, AND/OR PROHIBITION FROM APPEARING BEFORE THIS COURT. SEE GENERAL STATUTES § 51-84 AND PRACTICE BOOK §§ 85-1, 85-2.

(9) AC29818
ANTHONY OLIPHANT
No appearance
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION
Office of the Chief State’s Attorney
Brief of the petitioner-appellant due on or before April 17, 2009.

(10) AC31232
RICHARD KOSLIK
Office of the Chief Public Defender
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION
Office of the Chief State’s Attorney
Petitioner-appellant’s court reporter’s written acknowledgment of the transcript order with an estimated delivery date due on or before June 18, 2009.

(11) AC31136
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Office of the Chief State’s Attorney
v.
DENNIS R. ROSS
Dennis R. Ross, self-represented party
Defendant-appellant’s certificate re: transcript and, if transcript has been ordered, a court reporter’s written acknowledgment of the transcript order with an estimated delivery date and designation of contents of the record due on or before May 11, 2009.

(12) AC31128
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Office of the Chief State’s Attorney
v.
CLYDE MEIKLE
Clyde Meikle, self-represented party
Defendant-appellant’s court reporter’s written acknowledgment of the transcript order with an estimated delivery date due on or before May 27, 2009.

(13) AC30429
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Office of the Chief State’s Attorney
v.
BOYD PITTMAN
Darcy McGraw, Special Public Defender
Defendant-appellant’s brief due on or before July 28, 2009.

(14) AC30138
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
David J. Smith, Assistant State’s Attorney
v.
CARL J. DELVECCHIO
No appearance
Defendant-appellant’s brief due on or before February 17, 2009.

(15) AC31007
ABBOTT TERRACE HEALTH CENTER, INC.
Murtha Cullina LLP
v.
ANNA PARAWICH ET AL.
No appearance
Non appearing defendants-appellees’ brief due on or before July 23, 2009.

(16) AC30846
IN RE: SONIYA C., SAMANTHA C. AND MIGUEL C.
For petitioner: Colleen B. Valentine, Assistant Attorney General
For respondent-father: Alan M. Giacomi
Counsel for the minor child: Lynn Alvey Dawson
Guardian ad litem for respondent-father: Robert W. Shaver, II
Respondent father-appellant’s court reporter’s written acknowledgment of the transcript order with an estimated delivery date due on or before March 24, 2009.

(17) AC30956
IN RE: JAIMIE S.
For petitioner-mother: Howard I. Gemeiner
For respondent-father: David J. Reich
William G. Grady
Counsel for the minor child: David E. Cosham
Brief of the petitioner mother-appellee due on or before July 6, 2009.

(18) AC30849
IN RE: JAYDEN D.
For petitioner: Colleen B. Valentine, Assistant Attorney General
For respondent-father: Alan M. Giacomi
Counsel for the minor child: Eric J. Palladino
Respondent father-appellant’s court reporter’s written acknowledgment of the transcript order with an estimated delivery date due on or before March 21, 2009.

(19) AC30498
IN RE: MARCUS S.
For petitioner: Stephen G. Vitelli, Assistant Attorney General
For respondent-father: Roseann C. Canny
Counsel for the minor child: Trudy Condio
Counsel for the minor child’s brief, statement adopting the brief of either the appellant or appellee or detailed statement that the factual and legal issues on appeal do not implicate the child’s interest pursuant to P.B. § 67-13 due on or before June 1, 2009.

(20) AC30391
IN RE: GABRIELLE M.
For petitioner: Jessica Brooke Gauvin, Assistant Attorney General
Rene Bevacqua-Bollier, Assistant Attorney General
For respondent-mother: Traci J. Valery
Carol M., self-represented party
Counsel for the minor child: Matthew E. Naclerio
Thomas F. Mitola
Guardian ad litem: Children in Placement-New Haven
Record due on or before July 7, 2009.

THE FOLLOWING CASES ARE ASSIGNED FOR “FULL HEARING”

2:00 P.M.

AC29481 NNI
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Mitchell S. Brody, Senior Assistant State’s Attorney
v.
BRIAN DAWSON
Carlos Candal, Special Public Defender

AC30034 F02B
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Eileen F. McCarthy, Senior Assistant State’s Attorney
v.
SILAS S.
Christopher Y. Duby, Special Public Defender

AC30150 FBT
MARGARET JACARUSO
Harold L. Rosnick
Miller, Rosnick, D’Amico, August & Butler, P.C.
v.
RICHARD F. LEBSKI
Esty & Buckmir, LLC