*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing 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 Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the latest 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 the opinion as it appears in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publica- tions, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. *********************************************** IN RE SANDY J. M.-M.* (AC 40602) Alvord, Sheldon and Prescott, Js. Syllabus S, who was born in Guatemala and had entered the United States while she was still a minor, appealed to the trial court from the decision of the Probate Court dismissing her petition for special immigrant juvenile status findings and denying her petition for removal of her father as guardian. The trial court rendered judgment dismissing the appeal, from which S appealed to this court. Thereafter, S filed a motion for summary reversal of the trial court’s dismissal of her appeal from the decision of the Probate Court, which determined that because S had reached her eighteenth birthday and was no longer a minor, it lacked authority to make the requested findings. During the pendency of this appeal, our Supreme Court decided In re Henrry P. B.-P. (327 Conn. 312), in which it held that the Probate Court does not lose its authority to make special immigrant juvenile status findings pursuant to statute (§ 45a-608n [b]) when a child who is the subject of the petition reaches the age of eighteen during the pendency of the petition. Held that because the resolution of this appeal was controlled by In re Henrry P. B.-P., sum- mary reversal of the trial court’s dismissal of the appeal was appropriate under the circumstances of the present case; although our rules of practice do not contain an express provision authorizing summary dispo- sition of an appeal on the merits, this court has the authority to suspend the rules in the interest of expediting decision or for other good cause shown, and where, as here, the disposition of the appeal was plainly and undeniably mandated by a decision of our Supreme Court, summary disposition was warranted and further adjudication of the appeal would waste precious judicial resources, especially where, as here, such relief was unopposed and ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals