Unless otherwise provided by law and except in such cases in which the court has continuing jurisdiction, a civil judgment or decree rendered in the Superior Court may not be opened or set aside unless a motion to open or set aside is filed within four months following the date on which it was rendered or passed. The continuing jurisdiction conferred on the court in preadoptive proceedings pursuant to subsection (o) of section 17a-112 does not confer continuing jurisdiction on the court for purposes of reopening a judgment terminating parental rights. The parties may waive the provisions of this section or otherwise submit to the jurisdiction of the court, provided the filing of an amended petition for termination of parental rights does not constitute a waiver of the provisions of this section or a submission to the jurisdiction of the court to reopen a judgment terminating parental rights.

Judgments obtained by fraud may be attacked at any time. 180 C. 129. A motion to open and vacate a judgment is addressed to the court’s discretion. 184 C. 461. Cited. 185 Conn. 495; 187 Conn. 509; 191 C. 555; 196 C. 517; Id., 579; 211 Conn. 648; 214 C. 23; 215 C. 143; 217 C. 394; 223 Conn. 68; Id., 155. Court held legislature intended provisions of Sec. 17a-112 and this section to coexist so Superior Court has limited jurisdiction to open judgment for termination of parental rights for 4 months after its rendering but not thereafter in absence of waiver or consent. 224 Conn. 263. Cited. 225 Conn. 757; Id., 804. Prohibits trial court from entertaining motion to open and modify divorce decree with respect to nondisability military retired or retainer pay; time limitations on opening not preempted by federal law division of military retirement benefits. 226 C. 219. Cited. Id., 831; 228 C. 85; 232 C. 405. Judgment of Appellate Court in 34 CA 462 reversed. Id., 750. Cited. 236 Conn. 78; 239 Conn. 375. Section limits trial court’s general authority to grant relief from a judgment, but does not limit its personal jurisdiction over the parties. 249 C. 94. Defendant did not prevail on its claim that, in the absence of a finding of contempt, court lacked jurisdiction to enter postjudgment orders after expiration of the 4-month statutory period for opening a judgment; court’s continuing jurisdiction to enter orders in vindication of a prior judgment is grounded in its inherent powers and not its contempt powers and exercise of that jurisdiction in this case not barred by availability of appellate remedies. 260 C. 232. Trial court’s clarification of injunctive order 7 months after original order and modification was proper because court had continuing jurisdiction due to nature of injunctive order and internal inconsistencies in prior order. 275 Conn. 420. Order restoring case to docket is immediately appealable when challenged on the basis of court’s authority to restore case to the docket in light of the limitation period of section; court has continuing jurisdiction to vacate or modify a protective order after expiration of the 4-month limitation period of section. 276 C. 168. Plain language suggests that when a party files a motion to reargue, which would, if granted, alter substantive rights and duties of the parties, the 4-month limitation is measured from the court’s decision on the motion to reargue, as opposed to the initial judgment; because plaintiff filed her motion to set aside summary judgment within 4 months of the trial court’s denial of her motion to reargue, the motion to set aside was timely under section. 305 C. 654. Parties submitted to the jurisdiction of court by agreement and trial court acted within its authority in opening the dissolution judgment. 328 C. 376. Cited. 2 CA 543; 5 CA 417; 8 Conn.App. 254; 9 CA 446; 10 CA 160; Id., 669; 11 Conn.App. 171; 15 Conn.App. 308; 18 CA 166; Id., 589; 19 CA 213; 22 Conn.App. 4; Id., 396; Id., 424; 27 Conn.App. 755; judgment reversed, see 225 C. 157; 29 Conn.App. 465; Id., 482; 32 CA 203; 33 CA 197; 34 CA 419; Id., 641; 36 CA 73. Defendant’s filing of pleadings after judgment of dismissal could not have constituted a waiver of the 4-month period for opening judgment of dismissal. 37 CA 56. Cited. Id., 397; 38 CA 340; Id., 745; 39 CA 258; 40 Conn.App. 115; Id., 590; Id., 733; 42 Conn.App. 119; Id., 409; 44 CA 588; Id., 771; 45 Conn.App. 137; Id., 352; 46 Conn.App. 54; Id., 614. In absence of fraud, mistake, duress or accident, trial court was without jurisdiction to order rescission of stipulated judgment where request for rescission was made more than 4 months after entry of judgment. 49 CA 203. 4-month limitation period does not apply because the entry of nonsuit was a clerical error. 55 CA 655. Judgment against defendant that was contrary to law shocks the judicial conscience and violates principles of equity, and court’s denial of motion to open judgment, although filed more than 4 months after rendition of judgment, perpetuated the injustice. 59 CA 351. Discussion of “otherwise provided by law” provision; failure to file renewed motion to open judgment within 4-month limitation period. 69 CA 349. Because trial court did not make an express finding of mutual mistake, it lacked authority to open the judgment beyond the 4-month period. 78 CA 734. Provisions of section do not operate to strip court of its jurisdiction over its judgments, but merely operate to limit period in which court may exercise its substantive authority to adjudicate merits of a case. 87 CA 735. Clerical error in recorded judgment with respect to amount of deficiency which is inconsistent with actual judgment, may be corrected by trial court at any time, even after expiration of 4-month period set forth in section. 88 CA 592. A judgment rendered may be opened after 4-month limitation if it is shown that judgment was obtained because of mutual mistake. 109 CA 33. As a result of the trial court’s original order to “remove” cement blocks being open to different interpretations, it was appropriate for plaintiff to invoke the trial court’s continuing jurisdiction to interpret and to effectuate the order with respect to the cement blocks, and that court properly clarified rather than modified the original order. 111 CA 436. Court had authority to open judgment more than 4 months after its entry because plaintiff had by his actions waived right to raise claim under section. 120 CA 459. Trial court permissibly opened judgment and issued corrected memoranda of decision within 4-month time frame permitted by section, and such correction did not support claim that court failed to issue decision within 120 days under Sec. 51-183b. 125 CA 207. Section does not abrogate court’s common-law authority to open a judgment beyond the 4-month limitation upon a showing that the judgment was obtained by fraud, duress or mutual mistake; common-law reasons for opening a judgment seek to preserve fairness and equity. 146 CA 214. Trial court had authority to open summary judgment under section, and such motion was not the equivalent of a motion for a new trial or a motion to reargue. 150 CA 842. Section applicable to restoration of a withdrawn case. 154 CA 605. Court had authority to open judgment of dismissal pursuant to this section, rather than Sec. 52-212, where judgment of dismissal was rendered in response to failure of plaintiff’s counsel to attend dormancy status conference; section does not require a supporting affidavit. 161 Conn.App. 594. Section does not preclude court from granting plaintiff’s motion to correct a technical defect in a party’s name pursuant to Sec. 52-123 filed beyond four months. 180 CA 461. Four month period for filing motion to open was not tolled by filing of prior appeal and said period had run when motion to open was filed. 180 CA 818.