Town of Monroe v. Ostrosky

191 Conn.App. 474

215 A.3d 1212 (Mem)

TOWN OF MONROE et al.

v.Scott OSTROSKY

AC 40976

Appellate Court of Connecticut.

Argued January 7, 2019

Officially released July 30, 2019

Robert M. Fleischer, for the appellant (defendant).

Jeremy F. Hayden, with whom, on the brief, was John P. Fracassini, Monroe, for the appellees (plaintiffs).

DiPentima, C.J., and Bright and Beach, Js.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Scott Ostrosky, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion to open and to vacate the court's judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, the town of Monroe and several of its agencies and employees.¹ The defendant claims that he did not have notice of and an opportunity to be heard at an evidentiary hearing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The defendant owns property that is located in the towns of Monroe and Newtown. The town of Monroe served two cease and desist orders on the defendant on May 14, 2013, which orders alleged violations of zoning and inland wetlands regulations. The defendant failed to comply, and the plaintiffs served a summons and complaint dated February 20, 2014. In April, 2014, this case was consolidated with the nearly identical case of Newtown v. Ostrosky , Superior Court, judicial district of Fairfield, Docket No. CV-14-6041984-S, 2014 WL 4494552.

The cases brought by the towns of Newtown and Monroe, and the towns' various agencies and employees, thereafter shared the same pertinent history in the trial court and in this court. The cases were argued before this court on the same day. Parts II and III of our opinion in Newtown v. Ostrosky , 191 Conn. App. 450, 215 A.3d 1212 (2019), together with the factual...