Keyin T. Worth et al. v. Steven E. Korta et al. (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO OPEN OR SET ASIDE JUDGMENTS

The Court has reviewed the above motion dated March 29, 2010 filed by the plaintiff Keyin T. Worth (hereinafter also “Worth”) and the objection to said motion by the defendants Armand R. Choquette and Roberta Choquette (hereinafter also “The Choquettes”).

The plaintiff claims that she has newly discovered evidence that warrants a reopening of the trial.  “The standard that must be met is that the proffered evidence must be newly discovered, such that it could not have been discovered earlier by the exercise of due diligence and ․ likely to produce a different result in a new trial.”  Besade v. Interstate Security Service, 212 Conn. 441, 452 (1989).   The plaintiff's motion does not meet this standard.

The original origin of the water in question was not relevant to this Court's decision.   The Court based its decision on the issue of an injunction that there was presently no irreparable harm and that the plaintiff had an adequate remedy at law.   It is the present situation existing at the time of trial that is important, not the original origin of some of the water which predated the ownership by the plaintiff and the defendants.

Further, if the original origin of the water is evidence that the plaintiff wishes to produce, through due diligence the plaintiff had an opportunity to search the land records and do other investigation to find the people that she would now like to have testify.   There was a lengthy period of time given to the plaintiff to obtain an expert witness, and during that time and other times during the trial due diligence would have obtained this information and these witnesses.   Accordingly, the Court concludes that such newly discovered evidence could have been discovered earlier by the exercise of due diligence and because the original origin of the water was not relevant to the decision made by this Court, such evidence probably would not produce a different result.

The motion to open or set aside judgment is denied.

Rittenband, JTR

Rittenband, Richard M., J.T.R.