Appealing a Final Order - Father Used SSN to obtain apartment fraudulently

[Braveheart]

Jurisdiction

Connecticut

Hello TheLaw.com,

Unique story, I'm sure someone has something similar.

My father was on hard financial times and used my SSN to run credit and forged my name onto a tenet lease along with him and my sister. I never knew about this until I was served with a lawsuit for unpaid rent 4 years after he left the apartment. This was a two-bedroom unit, for two adults my father in his 60s and my sister in her 30s. I owned my home at the time and still live in another city for over a year before my father obtained this lease. Again, it was a two-bedroom apartment for two grown adults.

The judge in the case stated, "As the Court noted above, at trial, the parties were largely credible. P**** wouldn't call his actions "fraud" but he admitted to misusing his son's social security number and placing debts in his son's name. J******** was also credible, however, the Court does not believe that he had no knowledge of his father's actions. Speaking personally, as a son, the undersigned would have allowed my father to use my name and credit if he was in a position where he had to." Further "The plaintiff's manager admits she never saw J******* at the unit, nor provided him with keys"

All of the rental invoices were in my father's name and my sister's name, however, my sister (an actual tenet) was not included in the lawsuit. At the time this lawsuit was filed, I was running for US Congress and believe this was a political attack to include me in the lawsuit, even though the owner knew unequivocally I was never a tenet.

Do I have any legal recourse to this "implied consent" as the judge makes wild personal assumptions as to what I knew and didn't know? The owner of the apartment admitted she never spoke with me, never gave me keys, and did not witness my signature nor any permission to run a credit report.

My father admitted in open court, by oral and written testimony that he forged my signature and used my SSN to obtain the apartment. I was found jointly and severally liable for the debt with my father and need to clear my name.

Thank you!

 

[army judge]

My father admitted in open court, by oral and written testimony that he forged my signature and used my SSN to obtain the apartment. I was found jointly and severally liable for the debt with my father and need to clear my name.

When was the judgment against you issued? (Month & Year)

What is the amount of the judgment you allegedly owe?

You are incapable of doing that which you seek.

However, you can discuss the situation with a couple of local attorneys to see if you possess any right to appeal the adverse judgment.

Bear in mind, the appellate window closes all too quickly.

You might want to make such appointments ASAP.

You can have the judgment extinguished through bankruptcy, assuming you qualify for such an action.

You might find the following article informative:

Landlord and Tenant--Process for Collecting Pastdue Rent

 

[Braveheart]

Judgement was May 2021, however the order was not posted and notice was not sent until October 6th, 2021.

It's a 20 day window, so I have until the 26th to appeal. The amount is $11k.

I am filing an appeal and requesting the transcript which gives me an additional 10 days from when I receive the transcript to file my motion.

 

[adjusterjack]

You ran for Congress and you use the word "tenet" to describe a person who rents an apartment?

 

[Braveheart]

You ran for Congress and you use the word "tenet" to describe a person who rents an apartment?

Was typing on my phone, fat finger typo auto-correct, tenant is what it should have been.

 

[adjusterjack]

I know. Just joshing you.

As for appeal, the judge erred in basing a decision on conjecture not evidence. Might be enough to win the appeal.

 

[Braveheart]

I know. Just joshing you.

As for appeal, the judge erred in basing a decision on conjecture not evidence. Might be enough to win the appeal.

That is my hope.

Please let me know if I am thinking of taking the correct course of action:

Filing a Notice of Appeal - Transcript Order - If I read CT case Law correctly, does this prolong the time I have to appeal until I receive the transcript and then have 10 days to appeal?

File Appeal - Using the transcript and facts of the case, file the appeal by pointing to specific testimony and facts. Where I am lost is citing case law and procedures for the basis of my appeal.

File motion for articulation - Cite the conjecture not evidence or facts were used in the decision.

 

[Braveheart]

Hello,

I am appealing a housing court case where the Judgement in a Housing session ordered me a joint and severally liable party to the lawsuit. I have good legal grounds for my appeal and feel confident I will be removed from this appeal.

A Motion to Dismiss Appeal has been filed and is littered with false statements, incorrect use of law, and misrepresentation of the factual background and procedural history. I am filing an objection that has strong legal grounds for denial.

My question is should I file a Motion for Sanctions and relief? What sanctions and what relief can I pursue?

Please see my Motion below and let me know if I need to change anything. Names of parties have been removed.

Factual and Legal Objections to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Appeal

Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book § 66-8, the Plaintiff/Appellee, (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), The Defendant/Appellant (hereinafter the "Defendant"), in the matter above hereby respectfully requests this Honorable Court to deny the Motion to Dismiss Appeal filed November 15, 2021, by the Plaintiff, by their attorney, because pursuant to established case law, Connecticut Practice Book rules, and relevant facts, the Appeal was filed in a timely fashion.

I. BRIEF FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY:

By virtue of a writ, summons, and complaint bearing a Return Date of November 17, 2020, the Plaintiff commenced the underlying action in the Housing Session of the Superior Court seeking money damages for failure to pay rent and other related expenses under a one-year lease of property located in Stamford, CT. The complaint contained two counts, Count One directed to the defendant ONE and Count Two directed to the Defendant/Appellant, TWO.

The matter was tried virtually via a one-day Microsoft TEAMS court trial which took place on May 20, 2021. On May 23, 2021, the trial court, issued its decision, entitled ORDER containing the byline: Disposition: JDACTRP – JUDGMENT AFTER COMPLETED TRIAL TO THE COURT FOR THE PLAINTIFFS, which was followed by a two-page opinion that concluded with a finding in favor of the Plaintiff against both defendants awarding damages totaling $12,463.06 exclusive of costs and interest.

Correcting the Plaintiff's brief factual background and procedural history, the Defendant submits to this Honorable Court the Correct Factual Background and Procedural History with relevant facts not given by the Plaintiff's Attorney to the Court:

Following the order, no notice was given to any party, via electronic or US Mail, until the Plaintiff's attorney filed a "Caseflow Request (JD-CV-116)" (attached herein as Exhibit B) filed September 30, 2021. As a request of the request, the clerk discovered the error and issued notice on October 6th, 2021 (attached herein as Exhibit C) to all parties of the Order dated May 23, 2021 via U.S. Mail. The issuance of the Notice on October 6, 2021 began the 20-day appeal period under §63-1 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure which was therefore slated to elapse on October 26, 2021. The appeal was therefore filed in a timely fashion within the 20-day appeal period pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book §63-1 and §63-3. The Plaintiff had 10 days from the date of appeal to submit a Motion to Dismiss which therefore elapsed on November 4, 2021, thus the Motion to Dismiss filed on November 15, 2021 is untimely and the Plaintiff pursuant to §66-8 waived the right to seek dismissal of the appeal as untimely.

II. SPECIFIC FACTS UPON WHICH DEFENDANT RELIES FOR OBJECTION

The Plaintiff's attorney has knowingly misrepresented the facts of the case in order to misinform the Appellate Court as to the facts of the case, in an effort to persuade the Court in making an adverse ruling against the Defendant. Contrary to the Plaintiff's "specific facts" stated in the Motion to Dismiss the Appeal, the Plaintiff and their attorneys are aware no notice was sent by the Clerk following the Order dated May 23, 2021. On September 23, 2021, the Plaintiff's attorney sent an email to the Defendant (attached herein as Exhibit A), requesting to waive the 120-day rule for decision orders and to remind the Trial Court that the Judge was behind in his decision. Following the filing of the Caseflow request dated September 30, 2021 (Exhibit B) the failure to send notice of a Judicial Order was brought to the attention of the Clerk. Only after the reminder, did the Clerk send notice via US Mail dated October 6th, 2021 (Exhibit C) and updated the trial docket with the Order, thus beginning the 20-day Appeal period on October 6, 2021.

The Defendant's right of appeal commenced on October 6, 2021, and expired 20 days later on October 26, 2021. The Appeal was filed on October 25, 2021 in a timely fashion. The Defendant had no ability to appeal sooner than October 6, 2021 as no notice of the Court's decision was sent by the clerk either electronically or by US Mail until October 6, 2021.

In addition, the right to seek dismissal of the Appeal as untimely began October 25, 2021 (Notice sent via email to attorney of record, Exhibit D) and expired November 4, 2021. Therefore, the Plaintiff waived their right to seek dismissal for nonjurisdictional defects and no motion was filed on or before November 4, 2021, to extend the time to seek dismissal.

III. LEGAL GROUNDS UPON WHICH DEFENDANT RELIES FOR OBJECTION

Pursuant to the Rules of Appellate Procedure Practice Book § 66-8, the Plaintiff incorrectly states the timing of the appeal is a jurisdictional defect, when in fact the Handbook of Connecticut Appellate Procedure specifically states "an example of nonjurisdictional grounds for dismissal of an appeal includes the failure to file a timely appeal." However, the appeal as noted above in the facts was filed in a timely manner. In addition, nonjurisdictional Motions to Dismiss must be filed within 10 days of the appeal. Consequently, the Plaintiff waived their right to seek dismissal of the appeal for any nonjurisdictional defect such as untimely pursuant to § 66-8.

In addition, pursuant to the Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries Guide, Section 5: Motion to Dismiss – Appellate, the Defendant relies upon the following case for further evidence the Plaintiff waived their right to seek dismissal from a nonjurisdictional defect as no motion was filed within the 10-day period commencing on October 25, 2021 and expiring on November 4, 2021; "Connecticut Commercial Lenders, LLC v. Teague, 105 Conn. App. 806, 809, 940 A.2d 831 (2008)." The ruling stated:

"Because the plaintiff failed to appeal from the April 11, 2006 judgment within twenty days as required by Practice Book § 63–1, the defendants claim that the appeal from that judgment is untimely. The defendants, however, failed to file a motion to dismiss within ten days of the filing of the plaintiff's appeal, as required by Practice Book § 66– 8. Consequently, they waived their right to seek dismissal of the appeal as untimely."

Additionally, the Plaintiff's attorney brief factual background and specific facts relied upon within the Motion to Dismiss is in violation of Connecticut Practice Book Rules of Professional Conduct §Rule 3.3 (a)(1):

"A lawyer shall not knowingly: Make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer."

As evidenced by the Exhibits herein, the Plaintiff and their attorney were specifically aware no notice of Judicial Order was issued until October 6, 2021 and even brought the delay of notice to the attention of the Defendant and the Trial Court Clerk on September 30, 2021 (Exhibit A and B), thereby making a false statement of material fact in the Motion to Dismiss Appeal.

IV. Conclusion

Taking into consideration the factual history, legal grounds, relevant case law, and the misrepresentations of Fact and Law, the Motion to Dismiss was egregiously submitted and should be denied in its entirety. As a matter of law, this Motion to Dismiss has no merit as evidenced herein and summarized:

I. Formal notice of Judicial order was sent on October 6, 2021, beginning the 20-day Appeal Period expiring on October 26, 2021

II. The Appeal was filed timely on October 25, 2021

III. The Motion to Dismiss claims the Appellate Court lacks subject matter Jurisdiction, when in fact pursuant to the Appellate Procedure Handbook, timeliness of an appeal is stated as a specific example of nonjurisdictional defect thus limiting the Motion to Dismiss to a 10-Day period following the filing of the Appeal, beginning October 25, 2021 and expiring November 4, 2021

IV. No motion was filed claiming nonjurisdictional defects such as untimely filed appeals as stated in the Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries Guide, Section 5: Motion to Dismiss – Appellate within the 10-day period beginning October 25, 2021 as required by Practice Book § 66-8

V. Clearly established case law such as Connecticut Commercial Lenders, LLC v. Teague, 105 Conn. App. 806, 809, 940 A.2d 831 (2008) affirms the Plaintiff waived their right to seek dismissal for nonjurisdictional defects by not filing a timely motion within the 10-day period commencing on October 25, 2021

VI. Further the Motion to Dismiss seeks to undermine the Appellate court by purposely misinforming the court specifically by knowingly misrepresenting the factual history of the trial docket and incorrect use of law

WHEREFORE the Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court DENY the Motion to Dismiss.

 

[Red Kayak]

Relevant posting hx: Appealing a Final Order - Father Used SSN to obtain apartment fraudulently