In re Bachand, 306 Conn. 37 (2012)
Lisa Charette, the plaintiff and attorney-in-fact for Mary E. Bachand, appealed from a Superior Court judgment upholding the decision of the Probate Court for the district of West Hartford. The decision required the plaintiff to provide an accounting of her actions as attorney-in-fact for Ms. Bachand who executed a durable power of attorney. Ms. Bachand had progressive Alzheimer’s disease and was relocated to a long-term care facility in West Hartford, CT. The Superior Court ruled that the Probate Court had subject matter jurisdiction to order an accounting in accordance with Conn. Gen. Stat. § 45a-175 (b) because Ms. Bachand resided within the district of West Hartford.
On appeal, the plaintiff claimed the Superior Court improperly ruled that the Probate Court had subject matter jurisdiction to order the accounting under the circumstances and erroneously found that the defendant, Cheryl Miller-Gray, had standing to make an application for an accounting.
The Supreme Court held that Ms. Bachand’s lack of intent to reside in West Hartford was not relevant to the Probate Court’s jurisdiction. Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 45a-175 (b), the term “resides” means the place where a person actually lives no matter whether they have the intention to remain there. Further, the defendant had standing to proceed with an application for an accounting because she was the sole remaining successor attorney-in-fact pursuant to the durable power of attorney. The defendant did not need to present evidence to establish cause for the accounting pursuant to Con. Gen. Stat. § 45a-175 (b). Therefore, the judgment of the Superior Court was affirmed.