Page 31 - CLT120720

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS DECEMBER 7, 2020 ¦ 31

collecting the debt, the court concluded it did Plaintiff eventually filed a request for execu-
not have jurisdiction to hear the matter. tion and the court held a virtual hearing. Dur-
ing the hearing, defendant testified that there
were four working adults in the home, most of
INSURANCE LAW which had jobs, and three children. The tenants

Court Found That Third-Party filed CDC Declaration forms. The court found
Defendant Was Not Liable for Damage that even considering the COVID-19 pandem-
ic, defendant’s testimony and documents did
not support the application of the CDC Order
Resulting from Car Accident that required the tenant to make timely par-

CASE: Fairfield Auto Care, Inc. v. Progressive Direct. Ins. Co. tial payments. The court held that defendant
COURT: Fairfield J.D. at Bridgeport failed to pay rent that year in a timely manner
DOC. NO.: CV-19-6085696
COURT OPINION BY: Cordani and owed arrearage of rent. Defendant and her
DATE: November 17, 2020 • PAGES: 9 children have not made any good faith efforts
to pay even partial rent payments. Therefore,
Defendant issued an automobile insurance the court ordered defendant to pay partial pay-
policy to Christopher Ward, who allowed Chi- ments and if she does not, plaintiff may seek
oma Orajiuba to use his car for a period of an order of immediate execution.
time. Orajiuba brought the car in for repairs
to plaintiff ’s shop and signed a loaner agree-
ment. Plaintiff loaned Orajiuba a Subaru and PERSONAL INJURY

Orajiuba was involved in an accident. Plaintiff Court Denied Defendants’ Motion for
brought a cross complaint against defendant to
reimburse plaintiff for any damages that plain- Summary Judgment, Finding It Unclear
tiff was required to pay because of the accident. as to Who Was Liable for the Area in
Defendant moved for summary judgment and
the court granted the motion. Plaintiff ’s claim Which Plaintiff Fell
asserted that defendant’s policy covered the li-
ability of the Subaru and/or Orajiuba in con- CASE: Tate v. Bernardi
nection with the accident, and therefore defen- COURT: New Haven J.D. at Meriden
dant should pay the damages. The court turned DOC. NO.: CV-18-6015203
to the insurance policy and noted that there COURT OPINION BY: Sizemore
was no evidence that either Orajiuba or plain- DATE: October 23, 2020 • PAGES: 11
tiff was an “insured person” within the policy.
Furthermore, the Subaru was not a “covered Defendant Bernardi owns a single family resi-
auto.” Therefore, the court granted defendant’s dence and leased it as a group home to other de-
motion for summary judgment. fendants. Plaintiff alleged that he fell in a broken
drain water grate located in the driveway at the
property due to the fact that the grate area was
not properly secured and covered. Plaintiff sued
LANDLORD TENANT LAW Bernardi, who brought in several other parties.
Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment
Court Ordered Defendant to Pay Partial and the court denied it. The court determined
Rent Payments that the primary issue was whether the premises
have been entirely demised by landlords Bernardi
to the tenants, such that one can conclude that
CASE: Toussaint v. Pagan the landlords have no possession or control as a
COURT: New London J. D., Housing Session
DOC. NO.: KNLC 195020690 matter of law over the area where the accident oc-
COURT OPINION BY: Foley curred. Turning to the lease agreement, the court
DATE: October 09, 2020 • PAGES: 4 found that it was not entirely clear as to who con-
Plaintiff commenced this summary process ac- trolled the area where plaintiff fell. The varying
tion for non-payment of rent on August 29, lease provisions sometimes placed control to the
2019. The parties entered into a stipulated judg- tenants, while in other provisions the language
ment that provided for a final stay of execution appeared to retain control for the landlord. The
until August 31, 2020, and agreed to rental ar- court stated that the varying affidavits and depo-
rearage of $8,529. Defendant agreed to make sitions of the parties also made it unclear. There-
monthly payments for both rent and arrearage. fore, the court was unable to conclude as a matter

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune