Page 41 - CLT032221

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS MARCH 22, 2021 ¦ 41

Plaintiffs sued defendants, property owners did not. Further, the court found appellant had
and managers of premises where plaintiffs re- ample notice of his opportunity to file his ap-
sided, for failure to disclose presence of lead, plication, and failed to do so. The court granted
which led to minor plaintiff suffering lead poi- the motion for summary judgment.
soning. Defendants moved to strike complaint
because they alleged that plaintiffs failed to
join a necessary party, a party that defendants U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

claimed had an ownership interest in the prem-
ises. Plaintiffs argued that this interest was sep-
arable. The court argued that this party was not IMMIGRATION LAW
necessary because they have no present owner-
ship or economic interest in the property where Daughter of Former U.K. Citizen
alleged lead poisoning occurred. The court ar- Qualifies for an Immediate-Relative
gued that their presence did not preclude a fair
and equitable trial. Furthermore, defendants Visa Because She Was Statutorily
failed to file a timely apportionment claim as Under 21 When Mother Naturalized
required by statute.
CASE: Cuthill v. Blinken
COURT: U.S. Court of Appeals for Second Circuit
TRUSTS AND ESTATES • CIVIL PROCEDURE DOC. NO.: 19-3138

Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction COURT OPINION BY: Katzmann
DATE: March 09, 2021 • PAGES: 34
to Modify Decree of Estate Settlement The court affirmed a judgment of the U.S.
by Probate Court District Court for the District of Connecti-
cut, holding that 8 U.S.C. §1151(f)(2) incor-
porates the age-reduction formula in 8 U.S.C.
CASE: Fenstermaker v. Fenstermaker §1153(h)(1), which deducts processing time
COURT: Danbury J.D. from the age of an F2A visa beneficiary. To
DOC. NO.: CV-20-5015863
COURT OPINION BY: D’Andrea qualify for an F2A visa, the son or daughter
DATE: February 25, 2021 • PAGES: 43 of a lawful permanent resident must be under
Decedent executed his final will and testament 21 years old. The Child Status Protection Act
in 2016, which specifically made no provisions mandates that the government exclude from
in it for appellant, decedent’s son Scott; dece- the age calculation the time that it spent pro-
dent died in 2018. Appellee, the executrix of the cessing the visa petition. For example, if the
estate, filed an affidavit with the Probate Court daughter of a lawful permanent resident is 22
to enter final judgment approving the settlement years old when her F2A visa becomes avail-
of the estate, and the Probate Court entered the able but it took the government two years to
will and found the estate was fully administered process her petition, her “statutory age” for
and all debts settled in 2018. Appellant was duly F2A purposes would be 20 years old, mak-
notified of a hearing which would settle the es- ing her still eligible for an F2A visa. A related
tate, and did not raise an issue. In 2019, appel- CSPA provision provides that if the parent of
lant filed an application to admit a 1997 revoked an F2A beneficiary naturalizes while the F2A
will, and the Probate Court denied admission petition is pending, the F2A petition may be
finding the estate had already been fully admin- converted to a more favorable immediate-
istered. Appellant brought the matter before the relative petition, but only if “the age of the
Superior Court approximately one year later, [son or daughter] on the date of the parent’s
and the court denied appellant’s motion finding naturalization” is under 21. The question be-
the appellant lacked statutory authority via res fore the panel was whether the term “age” in
judicata to raise the claim outside of a timely ap- §1151(f)(2) incorporates the age-reduction
peal to the original probate decree admitting the formula set forth in §1153(h)(1). Based on the
2018 will. Appellee moved for summary judg- text, structure, purpose, and legislative history
ment, and the court sua sponte raised the issue of the CSPA, the panel held that it does. Also,
of whether the Superior Court had subject mat- because the daughter of plaintiff, a former
ter jurisdiction to entertain a direct challenge to U.K. citizen, was statutorily under 21 years
a probate decree admitting a will. Based largely old when plaintiff naturalized, she qualifies
on In Re Buckingham the court found that it for an immediate-relative visa.

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune