Parties must disclose "a computation of any category of damages claimed" and make "available for inspection and copying . . . the documents or other evidentiary material . . . on which each computation is based," pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a).
Emergency medical technicians who provide emergency first aid and who allegedly injure an individual while transporting the individual to the ambulance may be entitled to immunity under the Good Samaritan Statute, Connecticut General Statutes §52-557b.
Absent allegations that municipal defendants created or failed to remedy a highway defect, a complaint that alleges that a municipal worker negligently operated a motor vehicle may not necessarily invoke Connecticut General Statutes §13a-149, the highway-defect statute.
Allegations that an insurance company did not effectuate a fair, prompt and equitable settlement of the plaintiff's claims, or provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy for the denial of the plaintiff's claims, can be sufficient to allege a violation of CUIPA, the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act. On Nov. 21, 2010, an unidentified motorist allegedly caused a motor-vehicle accident that injured the plaintiff, Armando Canino, who underwent arthroscopic surgery.
A court can find that an expert appraiser's valuation of the fair market value of a business pursuant to the "goodwill registry" approach is not dependable, if the appraiser does not differentiate between "practice goodwill" and "personal goodwill."
A minor child, as the alleged victim of possible sexual abuse, lacks standing to appeal, via the child's representative, the decision of a hearing officer of the Department of Children and Families to remove a name from the child abuse and neglect registry.
For Social Security Act claims, the treating physician rule provides, as explained in the Second Circuit's 1999 opinion in Rosa v. Callahan, that "the opinion of a treating physician is given controlling weight if it is well supported by medical findings and not inconsistent with other substantial evidence."
An insurance company may not be required to defend a state court action that alleges that a minor intentionally sexually assaulted another minor, and that the minor's parents negligently supervised their child, because the underlying suit alleges intentional conduct for which coverage is excluded by the insurance policy.
Although Section 107 of CERCLA "does not provide for the award of private litigants' attorney's fees associated with bringing a cost recovery action," a plaintiff may recover for attorney work to identify potentially responsible parties.
Because the plaintiff's pregnancy with twins made it impossible for her to perform an essential job function, the involuntariness of her early leave under the Family Medical Leave Act, 42 U.S.C. §2611, was not actionable.
To protect the privacy of warranty claims customers, a court may order a manufacturer to forward a letter written by the plaintiffs that explains the nature of the plaintiffs' suit and requests that customers contact the plaintiffs' attorney.
As explained in the 2010 Appellate Court case of Fiorelli v. Gorsky, while "questions of fact ordinarily are not decided on summary judgment, if the issue of control is expressed definitively in the lease, it becomes, in effect, a question of law."
Based on the rules of the Bridgeport Civil Service Commission and City Charter, a layoff occurs if a firefighter is separated from employment when a position is discontinued due to either a lack of work or lack of funds.
As explained by the 2013 Appellate Court in Maldonado v. Commissioner of Correction, "[t]he habeas judge, as the trier of facts, is the sole arbiter of the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony."
For sexual intercourse, defined in Connecticut General Statutes §53a-65(2), our jurisprudence does not qualify the term "penetration, however slight," to require that the penetration occur without any intervening material.
38 U.S.C. §4323(b)(3) of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 does not confer exclusive federal jurisdiction; Connecticut courts have concurrent jurisdiction over a claim of wrongful termination due to military status against a private entity.
The phrase "may not be suspended or reduced in any manner" in a criminal statute may indicate the legislature's intent that neither a court, nor the commissioner of the Department of Correction nor the Board of Pardons and Paroles may reduce a mandatory minimum sentence.
For the open meetings provision in the Freedom of Information Act, Connecticut General Statutes §1-200(2) provides in relevant part that " '[m]eeting' does not include: an administrative or staff meeting of a single-member public agency…." Robert Gross appealed to the Freedom of Information Commission alleging that Donald Roe, Director, Wallingford Planning Program and Development, violated the Freedom of Information act by denying him the right to attend a Jan. 2013 recycling committee meeting.
An officer who works an extra hour before his assigned work day may not be entitled to four hours of overtime pay pursuant to a provision that applies when officers are recalled to work after the end of their regular work day.
A court can find that amending a complaint against a former president of a country would be futile, because the former president is entitled to immunity for action taken in an official capacity as head of state.
Allegations that a trusted member of the household intentionally created false evidence and provided that evidence to attorneys to use in a child custody case can be sufficient to allege extreme and outrageous conduct.
To prevail on a claim that a camp bench was dangerously unstable, a plaintiff must prove: 1.) the bench was defective; 2.) the camp owner knew or should have known that the bench was defective; and 3.) the alleged defect existed a sufficient time that the camp owner, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have discovered and repaired it.
In a quiet title action, allegations that municipal property taxes were "inflated, false and fraudulent" and that the municipality filed a tax lien and foreclosed on the property may be legally insufficient to challenge the tax deed.
A court can authorize the Department of Correction's personnel to provide intravenous fluids and nourishment over an inmate's objections, to prevent permanent harm and to preserve the life of an inmate.
A court may not possess personal jurisdiction, if plaintiffs file suit against a former board of education worker and the plaintiffs' marshal effectuates service of process pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §52-57(b)(7).
To prevail on an attempt to monopolize claim, a plaintiff must prove that a defendant willfully engaged in anti-competitive business practices, with specific intent to control prices or destroy competition, in an attempt to gain monopoly power.
The 2012 Second Circuit in Sousa v. Marquez, while not officially recognizing "backward-looking" right of access to courts claims, suits that cannot now be tried, ruled that such claims "are not cognizable if the plaintiff, claiming that the government concealed or manipulated relevant facts, was aware at the time of the earlier lawsuit [or, presumably at the time of a potential earlier lawsuit] of the facts giving rise to his claim."
A rebuttable presumption exists that the amount indicated in a complaint constitutes a good-faith representation of the amount in controversy, for purposes of the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold in 28 United States Code §1332.
The presumption of an in-district attorney rate can be rebutted, if use of an out-of-district attorney was reasonable, pursuant to Arbor Hill Concerned Citizens Neighborhood Association v. County of Albany, a 2008 decision of the 2nd Circuit.
As explained in the 2010 Connecticut Supreme Court decision in State v. Davis, "[t]he confrontation clause does not . . . suspend the rules of evidence to give the defendant the right to engage in unrestricted cross-examination."
It is well established, as stated in the 1992 Supreme Court decision in Walton v. New Hartford, that "[a] motion to open and vacate a judgment . . . is addressed to the [trial] court's discretion, and the action of the trial court will not be disturbed on appeal unless it acted unreasonably and in clear abuse of its discretion. . . ." Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., initiated this foreclosure action against Steven and Donna Russo in 2004.
When an issue affecting the court's subject matter jurisdiction comes to its attention, the court is obliged to decide that issue before taking one step further to adjudicate other matters pending before it in the action.
Public Act 07-194 amended Connecticut General Statutes §9-12 to provide that "a person shall be deemed to be a bona fide resident of the town to which the citizen applies for admission as an elector if such person's dwelling unit is located within the geographic boundaries of such town;" and, if the term "entirely" were read into "within," an elector residing in a dwelling unit straddling two jurisdictions would be able to register and vote in neither.
A paramedic performing emergency response was reasonably determined to be at greater risk of sustaining exposure to a blood borne illness than the average employee, or even other fire department employees or health care workers, and the determination fulfilled the statutory requirement of defining the claimant's illness as an occupational illness under Chapter 568.
Subject matter jurisdiction under the Workers' Compensation Act cannot be waived, or conferred by either agreement or conduct, and, provisions in stipulated agreements relating to matters outside the Workers' Compensation Commission's jurisdiction are matters that the parties engage in at their own peril.
A collective bargaining contract can provide that a bus company may lack discretion and may be required to transfer a bus driver, regardless of whether the bus driver is at fault, following a request by a school district.
Application of a U.S. Sentencing Guidelines enhancement that does not increase the statutory maximum or minimum sentence may not violate a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, pursuant to Alleyne v. United States, a 2013 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Absent mitigating circumstances, the Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise can discharge a worker who allegedly tests positive for marijuana a second time, in violation of a return-to-work contract, an employee assistance treatment plan and a drug free workplace policy.
Connecticut General Statutes §12-60, which permits a municipal assessor to correct any "clerical omission or mistake in the assessment of taxes," does not permit a municipal assessor to correct substantive errors, such as omission of a building.
Absent allegations of wanton, reckless or malicious conduct, a public defender may be entitled to immunity from a former client's legal-malpractice complaint, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §4-165.
Allegations that a worker expressed opposition to an allegedly discriminatory work policy, and that the worker's employer, which was aware of the employee's opposition, discharged the employee 21 days afterward, may be sufficient to establish prima facie retaliation.
Absent tolling, a third-party complaint for indemnification and contribution in a product-liability action must be filed within one year of the date that the original cause of action is returned to court, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §52-577a(b).