Maffucci v. Royal Park Ltd. Partnership

692 A.2d 813, 240 Conn. 915, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 96
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided March 27, 1997·No. SC 15577·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendants’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 42 Conn. App. 563 (AC 14586), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that there was sufficient evidence in the record to create a material issue of fact as to whether the defendants had actual or constructive notice of prior trespassers?
“2. Is the rule of § 335 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts regarding the duty of care owed a trespasser applicable to an electric utility whose operations are governed by § 16-11-102 (a) of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies?
“3. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that there was sufficient evidence on the record to create a material issue of fact as to whether or not Royal Park Limited Partnership created or maintained the switch gear that caused the injury to the plaintiff?”
Brian T. Henebry and Barbara J. Sheedy, in support of the petition. Joel M. Ellis, in opposition. Decided March 27, 1997

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

Maffucci v. Royal Park Ltd. Partnership, 692 A.2d 813, 240 Conn. 915, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 96 (Colo. 1997).

692 A.2d 813 (Maffucci v. Royal Park Ltd. Partnership) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Maffucci v. Royal Park Ltd. Partnership
707 A.2d 15 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1998)