Page 28 - CLT062220

28 ¦ JUNE 22, 2020 CONNECTICUT OPINIONS

Plaintiff sued to recover damages from the automate and operate the vessels. In 2011,
defendants pursuant to the Connecticut plaintiff ’s contract terminated. Two of plain-
Product Liability Act after she sustained per- tiff ’s employees, Jared Sparks and Jay Wil-
sonal injuries that she alleged were caused by liams, both of whom had signed non-compete
handling a bouquet of flowers that contained and non-disclosure agreements, left plain-
a fungus. She claimed that Delaware Valley tiff ’s employ and began working for defen-
Floral Group and Hartford Florists’ Supply dant. Defendant took over much of the work
Inc. put the flowers into the stream of com- for ONR previously performed by plaintiff.
merce. Delaware added Pennock Company Plaintiff sued defendant for tortious interfer-
and Fall River Florist Supply Company to ence with business relations, civil conspiracy,
the action by filing a third-party complaint. and CUTPA violation. A jury rendered judg-
Pennock and Fall River filed motions to dis- ment in favor of plaintiff and awarded it over
miss the third-party complaint, claiming that $800,000 in damages. Defendant moved to
they were improperly served because Dela- set aside the verdict, for JNOV, and for new
ware did not move to implead before serving trial, arguing the evidence was insufficient to
the complaint within the one year statute of support the jury’s verdict in favor of plain-
limitations. The trial court granted the mo- tiff. Among other things, defendant argued
tions to dismiss and Delaware appealed. The that the evidence failed to support a finding
court affirmed. The court held that the lower that plaintiff ’s non-compete agreements were
court correctly applied the standard for im- enforceable, since they lacked any geographic
pleading a third party into a product liabil- restriction. Defendant argued further that it
ity case; if a defendant wants to implead, it could not properly be found to be plaintiff ’s
must ask the court before doing so. In this competitor for purposes of plaintiff ’s claim of
case, Delaware did not ask the court before tortious interference because the services they
filing its third-party complaint. Because provided were different. The court denied the
Delaware did not comply with the statutory motions, finding first that the jury was prop-
requirements of impleading a third-party de- erly instructed on the factors to be considered
fendant, the court affirmed the lower court’s in determining the enforceability of the non-
judgment. compete agreements and could reasonably
conclude that the agreements were enforce-
SUPERIOR COURT able, despite the lack of a geographic restric-
tion, given both the circumstances and the
limited scope of plaintiff ’s business. Further,
BUSINESS TORTS the jury heard from multiple witnesses regard-
ing the similarity and/or dissimilarity of the
Evidence Supported Plaintiff’s Verdict work performed by the two companies and
On Claim of Tortious Interference With could reasonably find the evidence of similar-
ity to be more credible.

Business Relations CIVIL PROCEDURE

CASE: LBI, Inc. v. Charles River Analytics, Inc.
COURT: New London J.D. at New London
DOC. NO.: CV12-6018984 Plaintiff Missed Forty-Five Day
COURT OPINION BY: Knox Time Limit To File His Appeal; Court
DATE: May 26, 2020 • PAGES: 19 Granted Defendant’s Motion To
Dismiss
The court denied defendant’s motions to set
aside the verdict, for judgment notwithstand-
ing the verdict, and for new trial, finding the CASE: Panigutti v. Fairfield Probate Court
jury’s verdict in favor of plaintiff was support- COURT: Fairfield J.D. at Bridgeport
ed by the evidence. From 2009 to 2011, plain- DOC. NO.: CV-19-5040849
tiff had a contract with the Office of Naval COURT OPINION BY: Stevens
Research to develop and build unmanned DATE: May 15, 2020 • PAGES: 5
underwater vessels. Defendant collaborated Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant
with plaintiff on the development of inno- on April 30, 2019. On June 28, 2019, plain-
vative software and artificial intelligence to tiff filed an amended complaint, appealing

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune