Laviana v. Waterbury Retirement Board, No. Cv94-0118524 (Jun. 2, 1995)
This text of 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 6686 (Laviana v. Waterbury Retirement Board, No. Cv94-0118524 (Jun. 2, 1995)) 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 plaintiff alleged in his appeal that the Board acted with gross negligence in making the decision to deny him reinstatement. This issue was not addressed in the court's memorandum of decision, however, because it was not briefed by the plaintiff. When a party fails to brief his or her affirmative claim, the trial court can properly consider it abandoned. Collins v. Goldberg,
The court finds that the plaintiff abandoned the issue of whether the Board acted with gross negligence because the plaintiff did not brief the issue. Moreover, even if the issue had not been abandoned, the court would not find that the Board acted with gross negligence. The plaintiff failed to sustain his burden of proof to show that the Board acted with gross negligence.
VERTEFEUILLE, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 6686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laviana-v-waterbury-retirement-board-no-cv94-0118524-jun-2-1995-connsuperct-1995.