2006 Ct. Sup. 18885
No. FA-04-0104165Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Middlesex at Middletown
October 12, 2006
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION MAGISTRATE APPEAL (MOTION 148 DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 2006)
JULIA DICOCCO DEWEY, JUDGE.
This is an appeal by the Plaintiff, Gary Grote, from the decision of the Family Support Magistrate (the Honorable Alan Steele) denying his request to transfer a motion for modification (Motion 142 filed July 18, 2006). Before the State of Connecticut filed that motion, the defendant, Terisha Grote, had filed a separate motion for modification. Both motions seek modification of a court order entered in March 2006.
Upon receipt of these motions, appellant immediately filed a motion for transfer.[1] That motion was denied. The appellant requested reconsideration; the reconsideration was accomplished by a second magistrate, not the individual who entered the original, contested, ruling.
The appellant filed a timely appeal. Within 6 days of the oral argument, aware that this court was considering the matter, the State of Connecticut pursued the contested motion for modification in magistrate’s court. Orders entered, contingent upon this ruling.
The court having reviewed the file hereby finds as follows:
1. Substantial rights of the appellant were prejudiced. The appellant, having requested reconsideration of a magistrate ruling, was entitled to reconsideration as required by our rules of practice. The purpose of reconsideration is assessment by the initial magistrate, not a substitute.
2. The appellant raised serious questions concerning coordination of those multiple motions pending in the CT Page 18886 superior court action with the state’s more recent motion for modification. The magistrate failed to address any of those concerns.
3. This court takes no position on the merits of the motion to transfer. The only concern is the procedural irregularities caused by the exercise of jurisdiction while a valid appeal was pending. Therefore, it is ordered that:
The decision of the Family Support Magistrate is hereby overruled and vacated. The matter is remanded to the Family Support Magistrate for further proceedings consistent with this Memorandum of Decision. No costs are taxed to either party.
The Family Support Magistrate is specifically directed to consider all pending motions for modification, not just that filed by the State of Connecticut, together with the motions for discovery and motions for contempt pending at the time of the Magistrate’s decision. Should the magistrate decide that bifurcation would be in the best interests of all litigants, the magistrate should so indicate.
So Ordered.
CT Page 18887