Opinion
(SC 16103)
Argued January 21, 2000
Officially released February 15, 2000
Action to foreclose a judgment lien on certain real property owned by the defendants, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Stamford-Norwalk, where the defendants were defaulted and where the court, D'Andrea, J., granted the plaintiff's motion for judgment of strict foreclosure and rendered judgment thereon; thereafter, the court, Hickey, J., granted the defendants' motion to open the judgment and ordered the defendants to, inter alia, make certain payments to the plaintiff and set a new law day; subsequently, the court, Hickey, J., granted the plaintiff's motion to amend the law day for the defendants' failure to make the ordered payments, and the defendants appealed to the Appellate Court, O'Connell, C.J., and Hennessy and Stoughton, Js., which dismissed the appeal and remanded the case to the trial court with direction to set a new law day and the defendants, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed.
Charles D. Ray, with whom, on the brief, was John F. Carberry, for the appellants (defendants).
Thomas G. Wolff, for the appellee (plaintiff).
Opinion
This is a certified appeal from the Appellate Court involving the foreclosure of a judgment lien. Marine Midland Bank v. Ahern, 51 Conn. App. 790, 724 A.2d 537 (1999). During the proceedings in the trial court, that court issued an order that is the subject matter of the appeal. See footnote 1 of this opinion. Subsequent to the filing of the appeal in this court, however, the trial court set new law days and title to the property has vested in the plaintiff by virtue of the judgment of strict foreclosure of the lien. The plaintiff specifically concedes, moreover, that the order at issue in the appeal was limited in duration and, by virtue of that limit and by virtue of the judgment of foreclosure and passing of the law days, is no longer in effect. The appeal, therefore, is moot.
We granted certification to appeal from the judgment of the Appellate Court limited to the following issue: "Whether the Appellate Court properly concluded that the petitioners were not aggrieved by a trial court order prohibiting a nonparty general partnership from disposing of any of its funds, where the general partners of the subject partnership are two corporations, where the petitioners are the sole owners of one of those corporations, and where the order was requested to prevent the petitioners from disbursing funds from the partnership to themselves?" Marine Midland Bank v. Ahern, 248 Conn. 921, 733 A.2d 845 (1999).