Giuliano v. Somers, No. Cv 00-0801303 S (May 21, 2001)

Connecticut Superior Court

Giuliano v. Somers, No. Cv 00-0801303 S (May 21, 2001)

2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 6679

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedMay 21, 2001

DocketNo. CV 00-0801303 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 6679 (Giuliano v. Somers, No. Cv 00-0801303 S (May 21, 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.

Bluebook

Giuliano v. Somers, No. Cv 00-0801303 S (May 21, 2001), 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 6679 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

RULING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE FOURTH, FIFTH AND SIXTH COUNTS, AND SECOND PRAYER FOR RELIEF The Defendant has moved to strike the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Counts of the Complaint claiming recklessness, and the second prayer for relief claiming double and triple damages therefor. This case involves a claim for a motor vehicle accident. The Fourth Count involves the Defendant operator. The Fifth and Sixth Counts concern the Defendant owner and/or employer Jean Clean Building Maintenance, Inc.

The Defendant claims that the allegations of recklessness are insufficient. The Court concurs.

"There is a wide difference between negligence and reckless disregard of the rights or safety of others. . . . Simply using the words `reckless' or `recklessness' is not enough. A specific allegation setting out the conduct that is claimed to be reckless or wanton must be made."Dumond v. Denehy, 145 Conn. 88, 91 (1958). See also, Warner v.Leslie-Elliott Contractors, Inc., 194 Conn. 129, 138 (1984).

The allegations of the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Counts lack sufficient allegations setting out specific conduct to support an award of double or triple damages under General Statutes § 14-295.

The Defendant's Motion to Strike is granted.

David L. Fineberg Superior Court Judge

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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

RULING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE FOURTH, FIFTH AND SIXTH COUNTS, AND SECOND PRAYER FOR RELIEF The Defendant has moved to strike the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Counts of the Complaint claiming recklessness, and the second prayer for relief claiming double and triple damages therefor. This case involves a claim for a motor vehicle accident. The Fourth Count involves the Defendant operator. The Fifth and Sixth Counts concern the Defendant owner and/or employer Jean Clean Building Maintenance, Inc.

The Defendant claims that the allegations of recklessness are insufficient. The Court concurs.

"There is a wide difference between negligence and reckless disregard of the rights or safety of others. . . . Simply using the words `reckless' or `recklessness' is not enough. A specific allegation setting out the conduct that is claimed to be reckless or wanton must be made."Dumond v. Denehy, 145 Conn. 88, 91 (1958). See also, Warner v.Leslie-Elliott Contractors, Inc., 194 Conn. 129, 138 (1984).

The allegations of the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Counts lack sufficient allegations setting out specific conduct to support an award of double or triple damages under General Statutes § 14-295.

The Defendant's Motion to Strike is granted.

David L. Fineberg Superior Court Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 6679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giuliano-v-somers-no-cv-00-0801303-s-may-21-2001-connsuperct-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack