Gebhardt v. Fleet Bank, No. Cv 97 64635 S (Dec. 27, 1999)

Connecticut Superior Court

Gebhardt v. Fleet Bank, No. Cv 97 64635 S (Dec. 27, 1999)

1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16671

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedDecember 27, 1999

DocketNo. CV 97 64635 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16671 (Gebhardt v. Fleet Bank, No. Cv 97 64635 S (Dec. 27, 1999)) 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.

Bluebook

Gebhardt v. Fleet Bank, No. Cv 97 64635 S (Dec. 27, 1999), 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16671 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION OF FLEET BANK FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF Liability in cases such as this are based upon possession and control of the premises. Mack v. Clinch, 152 Conn. 295, 296 (1974). Control of the premises is a question of fact of which a lease is evidence but is not necessarily conclusive. Panaroni v.Johnson, 158 Conn. 92, 99 (1969).

The affidavit of the defendant's employee, Baunie McConnell, identified as a "Casualty Claims Administrator" does not identify the source of her proffered knowledge as to actual possession and control of the premises. It is doubtful that a person in her identified position would also have duties as concerns the actual maintenance of premises. Further the plaintiff, ostensibly a member of the public, cannot be expected to have actual knowledge of the relationship between the defendants so as to resolve complex questions of possession and control amongst these defendants.

The motion for summary judgment is denied.

L. Paul Sullivan, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION OF FLEET BANK FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF Liability in cases such as this are based upon possession and control of the premises. Mack v. Clinch, 152 Conn. 295, 296 (1974). Control of the premises is a question of fact of which a lease is evidence but is not necessarily conclusive. Panaroni v.Johnson, 158 Conn. 92, 99 (1969).

The affidavit of the defendant's employee, Baunie McConnell, identified as a "Casualty Claims Administrator" does not identify the source of her proffered knowledge as to actual possession and control of the premises. It is doubtful that a person in her identified position would also have duties as concerns the actual maintenance of premises. Further the plaintiff, ostensibly a member of the public, cannot be expected to have actual knowledge of the relationship between the defendants so as to resolve complex questions of possession and control amongst these defendants.

The motion for summary judgment is denied.

L. Paul Sullivan, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gebhardt-v-fleet-bank-no-cv-97-64635-s-dec-27-1999-connsuperct-1999.

Opinion

L. Paul Sullivan, J.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack