IN RE SKYLAR F. [*]
May 16, 2019 [**]
to adjudicate the respondents' minor child neglected,
brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New
Haven, Juvenile Matters, where the court, Conway,
J., issued an ex parte order of temporary custody and
removed the minor child from the respondents' care;
thereafter, the court, Burke, J., sustained the
order of temporary custody; subsequently, the respondent
father was defaulted for failure to appear; thereafter, the
court, Conway, J., rendered judgment adjudicating
the minor child neglected and committing the minor child to
the custody of the petitioner; subsequently, the court,
Marcus, J., denied the respondent father's
motion to open the judgment, and the respondent father
appealed to this court. Affirmed.
J. Oneto IV, assigned counsel, for the appellant (respondent
Bevacqua Bollier, assistant attorney general, with whom, on
the brief, were William Tong, attorney general, and Benjamin
Zivyon, assistant attorney general, for the appellee
DiPentima, C. J., and Elgo and Sullivan, Js.
respondent father appeals from the judgment of the trial
court denying his motion to open the judgment of neglect that
was rendered after the respondent was defaulted for his
failure to attend a case status conference. On appeal, the
respondent claims that the court improperly denied his motion
to open because the record does not support a finding that he
received ‘‘actual adequate notice of the [case
status] conference in violation of his rights to the due
process of law.'' We disagree and, accordingly,
affirm the judgment of the trial court.
following facts and procedural history are relevant to this
appeal. Skylar was born in September, 2018. On September 28,
2018, the Department of Children and Families (department)
assumed temporary custody of Skylar pursuant to a ninety-six
hour administrative hold. On October 1, 2018, the petitioner,
the Commissioner of Children and Families, filed a neglect
petition on behalf of Skylar. On that same date, the
department obtained an ex parte order of temporary custody. A
trial on the order of temporary custody was heard by the
court on October 12 and 19, 2018. At the close of the first
day of trial, the respondent received permission to be
excused from attending the second day of trial. At the close
of the second day of trial, the court ruled from the bench
and sustained the order of temporary custody.
the court ruled from the bench, the parties scheduled a case
status conference. The following colloquy occurred:
‘‘The Clerk: November 27th at nine?
‘‘[The Mother's Counsel]: I guess so.
‘‘[The Department's Counsel]: Can [the
respondent] be notified of that date, please, your honor?
‘‘The Court: So ordered.
‘‘[The Respondent's Counsel]: Actually, is it
possible to get a three o'clock ...