Skip to main content
· 1/31/2024

In re P. T.-W.

Syllabus

The respondent father filed a motion to open the judgment rendered by the trial court terminating his parental rights with respect to his minor daughter, P. In his motion, the father alleged that, although he had consented to the termination of his parental rights, he had recently discovered information that indicated that the mother of P and the mother's attorney had committed fraud by failing to provide certain vital information to the court and, that if he had known that information, he would not have voluntarily given up his parental rights. The mother filed a motion to dismiss the father's motion to open. Eight days prior to the scheduled hearing on the father's motion, the father's parent called the court clerk's office and stated that the father, who was incar- cerated in the state of Washington, would not be able to make it to court. The record contained notes from a clerk indicating that a call was placed to the correctional facility in Washington and that the clerk was told that, although the prison had access to Microsoft Teams, the collaborative meeting software used by the Connecticut Judicial Branch for remote hearings, it was only used for internal purposes, and that the prison ''[did] not do virtual for inmates.'' The scheduled hearing on the father's motion to open took place even though the father was not present. The court thereafter dismissed the father's motion. The father appealed to this court, claiming, inter alia, that the court erred in dismiss- ing his motion to open by proceeding with the hearing in his absence and without giving him a chance to participate remotely. Held that the trial court violated the respondent father's due process rights in conducting the hearing on his motion to open without giving him a meaningful opportunity to be heard on his motion: it was undisputed that the father was not present and was not afforded an opportunity to participate remotely, either by telephone or a video conferencing platform, at the hearing o

Judges: Suarez; Clark; Seeley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.