Page 35 - CLT060721

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS JUNE 7, 2021 ■ 35
CIVIL PROCEDURE • claim stemming from a car accident. Under that
CONTRACTUAL DISPUTES agreement, defendant was to receive the settle-
ment proceeds over a period of years. Defendant
Motion to Dismiss for Forum Selection had already received some payment pursuant to
the agreement and was scheduled to receive ad-
Clause Denied Where Terms Not ditional payments totaling $33,300. Plaintiff
Effectively Communicated filed an application for a declaratory judgment
seeking court approval of the transfer of a struc-
CASE: Leach v. Int’l Van Lines, Inc. tured settlement payment worth $31,326.58 from
COURT: Tolland J.D. at Rockville defendant. The court found that under the law,
DOC. NO.: CV-21-5014573 the current proposal was in the best of interest of
COURT OPINION BY: Sicilian defendant taking into account her welfare. She
DATE: May 10, 2021 • PAGES: 11 was advised in writing by the transferee to seek
Plaintiff hired defendant to assist her in moving independent professional advice regarding the
personal property from her home in Colorado transfer and either received the advice or know-
to a new residence in Connecticut, and signed ingly waived the advice in writing. There was no
a “binding estimate” for a price of $5,568, but evidence that the transfer contravened any appli-
plaintiff was ultimately charged over $10,000 cable statute or the order of any court or other
based on the defendant’s assertion that the vol- governmental authority. Therefore, the court
ume of property moved was larger than what the granted plaintiff’s application.
estimate was based on. The document included
a price-per-cubic foot of volume calculation of DISCOVERY • PRIVACY
the charged rate, at $6.01 per cubic foot. Plaintiff
was informed of the increase in the estimate prior
to the move. Plaintiff was informed that if she Motion to Seal Denied Where Minor
refused to sign the move would not be completed, Student Accused of Racism
so plaintiff concluded she had no choice but to CASE: Doe v. Hopkins School
sign because new occupants were scheduled to COURT: New Haven J.D.at New Haven
move into the property she was leaving. Plaintiff DOC. NO.: CV-21-6110316
brought a claim to recover, and defendant moved COURT OPINION BY: Wilson
to dismiss because the provisions in the docu- DATE: May 14, 2021 • PAGES: 16
ments required disputes to be litigated in Flor- Plaintiff’s minor son, who was previously diag-
ida. The court noted that the plaintiff was pre- nosed with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Dis-
sented with multiple “estimate” documents, some order, was enrolled to attend classes at defendant
of which contained a forum selection clause and day school. After starting classes, the minor son
some of which did not. The court found that the became involved with a third party Roe. Roe and
defendant failed to effectively communicate the the minor son had a falling out, and Roe began
terms to the plaintiff, and exercised their benefit accusing the minor son of making racially dis-
in an extreme disparity of bargaining power. As paraging remarks through social media. Wit-
such, the court declined to exercise their discre- nesses asserted that Roe began recruiting other
tion to require the plaintiff seek redress in Flori- students to accuse the minor son of racism, in an
da, and denied the defendant’s motion. attempt to get him expelled from the school. The
school began conducting an investigation into the
DEALS AND TRANSACTIONS minor son’s use of racial slurs on campus, while
the son’s parents and family combatted the alle-
Court Granted Application for a gations as a “witch hunt” and an incident of bul-
Declaratory Judgment lying perpetrated by Roe. Ultimately, the minor
son was expelled from the school and the school
CASE: VIS-10N, LLC v. Sheldon requested tuition for the semester. The defendant
COURT: Litchfield J.D. at Torrington school also refused to release the minor student’s
DOC. NO.: CV-21-6027775 transcripts. Plaintiff brought claims against de-
COURT OPINION BY: Shaban fendant for breach of contract, good faith and
DATE: May 14, 2021 • PAGES: 6 fair dealings, negligence, reckless or wanton mis-
Defendant had previously entered into a settle- conduct, and emotional distress. Plaintiff moved
ment agreement to resolve a personal injury for an order to seal and proceed anonymously
CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune