Blume v. Commissioner of Social Services, No. Cv 95 024 95 63 (Mar. 6, 1996)
Opinion of the Court
The court's review of the file and the record in this case indicated that there existed a question of its jurisdiction as a result of the delay between the commissioner's decision and the filing of the appeal. Accordingly, in its notice to the parties of the date scheduled for oral argument on the appeal, the court requested that the parties be prepared to address that issue. The defendant commissioner subsequently filed a memorandum of law on CT Page 1621 the subject, urging the court to dismiss the appeal. Neither plaintiff nor his counsel appeared for oral argument on the date scheduled, March 5, 1996. Accordingly, the court, with the consent of the defendant commissioner, decides the case on the basis of the parties' briefs, the court's file and the administrative record.
The court must "fully resolve" any jurisdictional question before considering the merits of the appeal. Castro v. Viera,
In the present case, the certified mail receipt, which is in the administrative record, shows that the commissioner's final decision was mailed to the plaintiff on May 30, 1995. The court's file on the appeal shows that the appeal was filed in the office of the clerk of the Superior Court at Meriden on July 31, 1995. That is the sixty-second day after the mailing of the final decision, beyond the forty-five day limit prescribed by §
The appeal is dismissed.
Maloney, J.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.