Page 31 - CLT062220

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS JUNE 22, 2020 ¦ 31

PERSONAL INJURY the right to launch boats at the shoreline. Ma-
rio’s wife, Stella, later inherited his interest in
Court Denied Defendant’s Motion For the property. She shared that interest with her
Summary Judgment In Slip And Fall son. Defendant acquired the servient property
Case On Icy Walkway in 1957. It developed the property, adding a
road, parking, boat launch, and seawall where
there had once been nothing but marshland.
CASE: Schnelwar v. The Stamford Hospital Stella and her son sued defendant to quiet title
COURT: Stamford/Norwalk at Stamford to the right of way, arguing that defendant’s de-
DOC. NO.: CV196040417 velopment of the property interfered with their
COURT OPINION BY: Povodator use of the right of way to access the shoreline.
DATE: June 01, 2020 • PAGES: 8 Among other things, defendant’s construction
prevented them from being able to drive across
Plaintiff was providing valet parking services to their right of way to the shore. It also prevented
visitors on defendant’s premises. It had been them from launching a boat from their vehicle,
snowing and he was putting salt on the icy walk- or mooring a boat at the shoreline. The court
way when he slipped and injured himself. Plain- rendered judgment in favor of defendant, find-
tiff sued and defendant moved for summary ing that plaintiffs’ right of way was never in-
judgment, claiming plaintiff was more than 50% tended to accommodate vehicles or to include
responsible for the accident and that plaintiff ’s mooring rights. The deed makes no mention of
actions and injuries were not reasonably fore- either. Further, plaintiffs’ testimony confirmed
seeable. The court denied defendant’s motion. their recollection that Mario’s custom was to
As to the defendant’s first argument, the court drag his boat across the marshland in order to
held that defendant did not provide any author- launch it into the bay. He did not use a vehicle
ity or legal standard for the court to conclude for carrying or launching the boat. Indeed,
that plaintiff was more than 50% responsible. prior to the improvements constructed by de-
As to defendant’s second argument, the court fendant, the marshland area never would have
reasoned that this was not a situation where supported vehicular traffic. Defendant’s im-
there was some level of remoteness between the provements thus did not interfere with plain-
negligence and resulting injury. It stated that it tiffs’ right of way.
was inherently foreseeable that someone legally
on defendant’s land might slip and sustain an
injury as a result of slippery areas. Plaintiff ’s
conduct of adding salt to the walkway did not STATE ELECTIONS
change the foreseeability analysis. Therefore,
the court denied defendant’s motion for sum- ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION
mary judgment.

REAL ESTATE ELECTION AND POLITICAL LAW

Improvements to Servient Property Respondent Properly Registered to
Did Not Interfere With Deeded Vote and to Run for Office at Her True
Easement Domicile Address

CASE: Peruzzotti v. State Dep’t of Energy & Envtl. Prot. CASE: In the Matter of a Complaint by Peterson
COURT: State Elections Enforcement Commission
COURT: New London J.D. at New London DOC. NO.: 2019-101A
DOC. NO.: CV17-6031455
COURT OPINION BY: Knox COURT OPINION BY: Penny
DATE: June 03, 2020 • PAGES: 6
DATE: May 26, 2020 • PAGES: 14
The court rendered judgment in favor of de- The State Elections Enforcement Commission
fendant, finding that improvement to servient dismissed a complaint, finding that respon-
property did not interfere with plaintiffs’ ease- dent was properly registered both to vote and
ment. In 1954, Mario Peruzzotti gained title to to run for office at her true residence address.
a parcel of property, along with a right of way Complainant alleged that Jacqueline Nadal
from that property to the shore of a nearby bay. improperly signed a candidate certification
The right of way included landing rights and form and voted in the March 6, 2018 Hartford

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune