Page 36 - CLT010421

36 ¦ JANUARY 4, 2021 CONNECTICUT OPINIONS

Court Granted in Part Defendants’ suffered a fractured left femur requiring surgery,
left knee pain, left leg pain, and pain and suffer-
Motion to Strike Negligence Counts in ing. Plaintiff sued defendant for negligence, claim-
Lawsuit Following Sailboat Crash ing that the fall was caused solely by defendant’s
failure to exercise due care. Defendant moved
CASE: Flaherty v. Sood for summary judgment and the court denied the
COURT: Stamford/Norwalk J.D. at Stamford motion. The court found that there were several
DOC. NO.: CV-20-6047916 genuine issues of material fact regarding plaintiff’s
COURT OPINION BY: Krumeich claims. Notably, whether plaintiff was contribu-
DATE: December 07, 2020 • PAGES: 22 torily negligent, whether plaintiff was exercising
due care, whether the alleged defect was the proxi-
In this lawsuit, plaintiff alleged she was injured mate cause of the fall, and whether the City had
when the sailboat she was on struck a rock. De- actual or constructive notice of the allege defect.
fendants Van Breems rented the boat to defendant Therefore, the court denied defendant’s motion.
Sood, who was operating the boat when it crashed.
Defendants filed a motion to strike counts three
and four, which alleged respondeat superior li-
ability, negligent entrustment, and negligence. The Court Held that Plaintiff Did Not Timely
court granted the motion as to the claims of neg- File His Notice of a Statutory Dram
ligence and negligent entrustment but denied it as Shop Action
to the respondeat superior liability claim. The court
first addressed the negligent entrustment claim. It
found that plaintiff failed to allege the likelihood CASE: Hernandez-Lopez v. U.S. 1 Billiard, LLC
of unsafe use of the sailboat at the time defen- COURT: New Haven J.D.
dants turned over the boat to Sood, and defen- DOC. NO.: CV-19-6098693
COURT OPINION BY: Young
dants’ knowledge of this likelihood. Plaintiff did DATE: December 10, 2020 • PAGES: 7
not claim that defendants had actual knowledge Plaintiff was injured as a passenger in a car accident.
of Sood’s inexperience or incompetence, but rather The driver of the car, as well as plaintiff, had been
alleged they had constructive knowledge based on patrons of defendant’s establishment. Plaintiff pro-
defendants’ failure to perform due diligence before vided notice of a statutory dram shop action to de-
giving Sood the boat. The court reasoned there was fendant’s agent for service of process 148 days after
a lack of factual allegations to support the conclu- the accident. Plaintiff claimed he was incapacitated
sion of Sood’s incompetence. As to the negligence and therefore had 180 days to provide notice of his
claim, plaintiff alleged that defendants were negli- claim. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss and
gent in failing to conduct due diligence as to Sood’s the court granted it. Defendants argued that plain-
competence. The court found that plaintiff failed tiff was not incapacitated and therefore his notices
to allege facts that showed the breach of duty in were untimely after 120 days had passed. The court
chartering the sailboat to an inexperienced skipper, reviewed medical records to determine if plaintiff
and they failed to allege facts that showed how de- was incapacitated. Noting that he was injured, the
fendants’ omissions or acts caused plaintiff’s inju- court also stated that the records documented that
ries. Lastly, the court found plaintiff stated a claim plaintiff was alert and oriented. When he was read-
for liability under respondeat superior because the mitted to the hospital, he was also noted to be alert
Graves Amendment provided for one. and responding appropriately. The court reasoned
there was no evidence that plaintiff was incapable
of decision making. Therefore, the court granted
PERSONAL INJURY • CIVIL PROCEDURE the motion to dismiss.

Court Denied Defendants’ Motion for PERSONAL INJURY • DAMAGES
Summary Judgment in Trip and Fall Case

CASE: Esparza v. City of Meriden Court Awarded Damages in Lawsuit
COURT: New Haven J.D. at Meriden Arising from Car Accident
DOC. NO.: CV-19-6016923
COURT OPINION BY: Sizemore
DATE: December 10, 2020 • PAGES: 8 CASE: Allen v. Robitaille
COURT: Tolland J.D. at Rockville
Plaintiff alleged that he was walking on a public DOC. NO.: CV-18-6016384
sidewalk in the city of Meriden when he tripped COURT OPINION BY: Sicilian
and fell over uneven concrete. He alleged that he DATE: December 08, 2020 • PAGES: 5

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune