Feldman v. Sebastian, No. 556291 (Jun. 5, 2001)
This text of 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 7762 (Feldman v. Sebastian, No. 556291 (Jun. 5, 2001)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In her request for a prejudgment remedy the plaintiff alleges that the automobile insurance policy insuring Sebastian, at the time of the accident, is insufficient to cover the amount of the damages the plaintiff and the estate have suffered. The plaintiff alleges that Graham is liable to the plaintiff and the estate pursuant to the family car doctrine.
The defendants have stipulated on the record that there is probable cause to sustain the plaintiff's request for a prejudgment remedy. The only issue currently before the court is whether the court may order the garnishment of payments made to the defendants pursuant to the Mashentucket Pequot Tribal incentive program. Both parties agree that the amount, duration and frequency of the payments are at the Mashentucket Pequot Tribe's (tribe) sole discretion.
In her application, the plaintiff request that the court order the garnishment of incentive payments prior to their payment by the tribe to the defendants. The defendants argue that the court does not have jurisdiction to order the garnishment of these funds because of the tribes status as a sovereign nation.
A garnishment action is a quasi in rem proceeding. Dorr-Oliver, Inc.v. Willett Associates,
The Mashantucket Pequot Tribe is a federally recognized tribe.
II. Ordering the defendants' to surrender incentive payments to a receiver
The plaintiff argues, without citing any legal or statutory authority, that the court may order the defendants, once in receipt of tribal incentive payments, to transfer those funds to a receiver. This court has not been able to locate any legal or statutory authority for this position. As this court is not required to assess any of the plaintiff's arguments which are unsupported by legal authority; Mullen Mahon, Inc.v. Mobilmed Support Services, LLC,
D. Michael Hurley, Judge Trial Referee
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 7762, 29 Conn. L. Rptr. 737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feldman-v-sebastian-no-556291-jun-5-2001-connsuperct-2001.