in the original) (citing Hinchliffe v. American Motors Corp., 184 Conn. 607, 440 A.2d 810, 815 (1981))). Thus, the district court correctly concluded that the jury’s award of punitive damages on the unjust enrichment count contravened Connecticut law. We note that the jury’s award was likely due to the fact that both the jury charge and the special verdict form failed to instruct the jury that it could not award punitive damages on the unjust enrichment count. The district court, however, in denying the motion for punitive damages, caught this error and corrected it before entering judgment for Edible Arrangements. A trial court certainly may correct a legal error of its own, prior to or even after entering a final judgment. Cf. In re 310 Assocs., 346 F.3d 31, 35 (2d Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Schildhaus v. Moe, 335 F.2d 529, 531 (2d
holding that when the district court mistakenly ordered prejudgment interest and a motion to amend was made more than one year after entry of judgment no relief was available under rule 60b6 because rule 60b1 clearly applied recognizing that the district court is afforded broad discretion in ruling on motions for relief from judgment holding that the court was precluded from considering whether the district court had abused its discretion in ruling on defendants summary judgment motion before allowing plaintiff to conduct requested discovery where the plaintiff had not filed an affidavit pursuant to rule 56f and stating that  when a party does not avail himself of relief under rule 56f it is generally not an abuse of discretion for the district court to rule on the motion for summary judgment  citation omitted holding in a case where the plaintiff had argued that the district court lacked jurisdiction to amend its judgment more than ten days after entry because that is the time limit under federal rule of civil procedure 59 that a district court can amend its judgment because of mistake or inadvertence months after judgment has been entered pursuant to rule 60b of the federal rules of civil procedure holding that motions for relief from judgment or order brought under federal rule of civil procedure 60b1 provide means for a district court to correct legal errors by the court internal citation omitted