Gagnon v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., No. 122287 (Jun. 29, 2001)
This text of 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 8768 (Gagnon v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., No. 122287 (Jun. 29, 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
The second count reads, after incorporating paragraphs 1 through 4 of count one, paragraph 5, at all times mentioned herein, the use, control and inspection of said premises, and in particular the wood/lumber area of the building supply store, was exclusive to the defendant corporation, its servants, agents and/or employees.
Said occurrence was due to no voluntary act on the part of the plaintiff. The defendant knew or had it exercised due care for proper diligence should have known of the aforesaid conditions.
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur allows a plaintiff to sustain its CT Page 8769 burden of proof on a claim of negligence without offering direct evidence about the cause of the injury producing event. Giles v. City of NewHaven,
To invoke res ipsa loquitur, the plaintiff must prove the following:
(1) The situation, condition or apparatus causing the injury must be such that in the ordinary course of events no injury would result from a careless construction, inspection or user. (2) Both inspection and user must have been, at the time of the injury, in the control of the party charged with neglect. (3) The injurious occurrence or condition must have happened irrespective of any voluntary action at the time by the party injured. Schugarst v. Schumann,
Several Superior Court cases as cited in the defendant's brief indicate that res ipsa loquitur is not a separate cause of action from negligence. Therefore, various Superior Courts have stricken a res ipsa loquitur claim where the plaintiffs have separately alleged it as a cause of action. The courts have indicated that res ipsa loquitur is not a cause of action and cannot be, therefore, brought in a separate count.
In their memorandum in opposition to the motion to strike, the plaintiffs quote the case of Gilbert v. Misslesex Hospital,
___________________ 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. 8768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gagnon-v-home-depot-usa-inc-no-122287-jun-29-2001-connsuperct-2001.