Gaudio v. Romanov, 23 Conn. Supp. 409

Summary

The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the defendant appealed from interlocutory rulings rather than a final judgment. It held that orders denying a motion to erase, granting a motion to expunge pleadings, and restoring a case to the docket were not final judgments from which an appeal could be taken. The court also noted that the case had been pending in the Circuit Court and consolidated the defendant’s separate appeals for consideration.

Holdings

1. The orders denying the motion to erase the case from the docket and granting the motion to expunge the amended answer and counterclaim were interlocutory and did not constitute final judgments from which an appeal could be taken.
2. An order granting a motion to restore a case to the docket is not a final judgment and is not appealable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an appeal lies from an order denying a motion to erase a case from the docket.
2. Whether an appeal lies from an order granting a motion to expunge an amended answer and counterclaim.
3. Whether an appeal lies from an order restoring a case to the docket.
4. Whether the appellate court had jurisdiction in the absence of a final judgment.

Disposition

dismissed