Opinion
FA114037609S
05-19-2017
Ellen Tartaglione v. Salvatore Tartaglione
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER RE MOTION TO OPEN JUDGMENT #108.00
Mary E. Sommer, J.
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FACTS
The defendant has filed a motion to open judgment entered January 7, 2013 for alleging fraudulent nondisclosure by the plaintiff of a material marital asset. The court conducted a hearing on the motion at which both sides testified and presented evidence on January 24, 2017. Based on the evidence, the court makes the following factual findings.
Plaintiff's mother quitclaimed her interest in a townhouse located at * Indian Harbor Drive, Greenwich, Connecticut on February 7, 2009. The subject deed did not reserve a life use in the grantor. Thereafter, the Plaintiff executed a quit claim deed in which she quitclaimed her interest to her sister Robin Bradshaw and to herself as joint tenants with right of survivorship on the day before the dissolution hearing. The property generated rental income of $3,750 per month or $44,000 annually.
The plaintiff did not include ownership of Indian Harbor Drive, the property or the monthly income generated by the property on either August 15, 2012 and October 4, 2012. The omission of this information was intentional and resulting in the plaintiff filing affidavits which were not true and accurate.
APPLICABLE LAW AND ANALYSIS
The scope of the court's authority on this matter is set forth in Oneglia v. Oneglia, 14 Conn.App. 267, 540 A.2d 713 (1988). Later cases, referenced below, have applied the general rule and provide guidance to the court on this issue. Based on the evidence presented, the court finds that there was no laches or unreasonable delay after discovery of the fraud, the proof of fraud was clear and there is a substantial likelihood that a new trial would reach a different result. Billington v. Billington, 220 Conn. 212, 218, 595 A.2d 1377 (1991); Terry v. Terry, 102 Conn.App. 215, 220-30, 925 A.2d 375, cert. denied, 284 Conn. 911, 931 A.2d 934 (2007). The court finds that there is probable cause to open the judgment for the limited purpose of proceeding with discovery related to the fraud claim.
CONCLUSION
The court further concludes that the evidence established that the plaintiff's financial disclosure was incomplete and inaccurate in material aspects which could have changed the distribution of marital property.
Motion 108 is GRANTED.