McCullough v. Rocky Hill

── McCullough v. Rocky Hill ── Court: Connecticut Appellate Court Date: May 19, 2026 Author: Elgo Category: General ************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecti- cut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying an opinion that appear in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced or distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ************************************************  McCullough v. Rocky Hill STEPHEN C. MCCULLOUGH v. TOWN OF ROCKY HILL (AC 47717) Elgo, Suarez and Seeley, Js. Syllabus The plaintiff appealed from the trial court’s judgment granting the defen- dant town’s motion to strike the plaintiff’s substitute complaint seeking declaratory relief with respect to certain real property taxes assessed by the town. He claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly granted the motion to strike the plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. Held: This court dismissed as moot the portion of the plaintiff’s appeal challenging the trial court’s judgment rendered on the stricken complaint, as this court could not afford the plaintiff any practical relief consistent with the relief requested in his substitute complaint, and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his claim was reviewable under the capable of repetition, yet evading review exception to the mootness doctrine. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees to the town pursuant to the statute (§ 12-140) governing the recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by a municipality in defending a civil action brought as a result of a tax sale, as the plaintiff failed to provide to this court any basis on which to reach a determination that the trial court could not have reasonably concluded that such fees should be awarded. Argued November 12, 2025—officially released May 19, 2026 Procedural History Action seeking, inter alia, a declaratory judgment determining whether the plaintiff owed real property taxes, interest and lien fees to the defendant, and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the judi- cial district of New Britain, where the court, Knox, J., granted the defendant’s motion to strike the complaint; thereafter, the court, Hon. Joseph M. Shortall, judge trial referee, granted the defendant’s motion to strike the plaintiff’s substitute complaint and rendered judg- ment thereon; subsequently, the court, Hon. Joseph M. Shortall, judge trial referee, awarded attorney’s fees to the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed in part; affirmed. Stephen C. McCullough, self-represented, the appel- lant (plaintiff). Adam J. Cohen, for the appellee (defendant).  McCullough v. Rocky Hill Opinion SEELEY, J. The self-represented plaintiff, Stephen C. McCullough, appeals from the jud