Amo v. Pincince

740 A.2d 895, 55 Conn. App. 767, 1999 Conn. App. LEXIS 447
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided November 16, 1999·No. AC 19304·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, Charles Amo, appeals from the decision1 of the trial court granting the defendants’ motion to open a judgment of strict foreclosure after the law day had passed and title vested in the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims that the court lacked jurisdiction to open the judgment because General Statutes § 49-15 prohibits the opening of a foreclosure judgment after title has passed. The defendants, Robert J. Pin-cince and Joan C. Pincince, claim that the foreclosure [768] judgment was improperly rendered because they were improperly defaulted for failure to appear at a time when Robert Pincince had filed a pro se appearance. The plaintiff disputes the defendants’ contention that Robert Pincince’s appearance was on file when the default was entered. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

The plaintiff has filed with this court, purportedly pursuant to Practice Book § 64-1, a transcript of the trial court’s oral decision signed by the court. The transcript, however, fails to disclose the reasons for the court’s decision to open the judgment, and the plaintiff failed to file a motion for articulation pursuant to Practice Book § 66-5.

Because the plaintiff failed to provide us with an adequate record, we decline to review his claim. “The duty to provide this court with a record adequate for review rests with the appellant. Practice Book § 60-5; Chase Manhattan Bank/City Trust v. AECO Elevator Co., 48 Conn. App. 605, 607, 710 A.2d 190 (1998).” State v. Combs, 51 Conn. App. 700, 701, 725 A.2d 349 (1999).

The trial court’s granting of the defendants’ motion to open is affirmed.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Amo v. Pincince, 740 A.2d 895, 55 Conn. App. 767, 1999 Conn. App. LEXIS 447 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).

740 A.2d 895 (Amo v. Pincince) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Amo v. Pincince
747 A.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2000)