Maloni v. Vermont Mutual Ins. Co., No. Cv98-0489281s (Apr. 29, 1999)

Connecticut Superior Court

Maloni v. Vermont Mutual Ins. Co., No. Cv98-0489281s (Apr. 29, 1999)

1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 4085, 24 Conn. L. Rptr. 470

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedApril 29, 1999

DocketNo. CV98-0489281S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 4085 (Maloni v. Vermont Mutual Ins. Co., No. Cv98-0489281s (Apr. 29, 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

Maloni v. Vermont Mutual Ins. Co., No. Cv98-0489281s (Apr. 29, 1999), 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 4085, 24 Conn. L. Rptr. 470 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Having granted the motion to reargue and having reconsidered the arguments of the parties, this court changes its earlier ruling. The defendants' motion to strike the First Count of the plaintiff's Amended Complaint is granted. The plaintiff has filed an allegation based on a claimed violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 38a-816 (15). That count states a claim against the plaintiffs property and casualty insurer. Although a claim pursuant to § 38a-816 (15) of C.G.S. may be sustained with an allegation of a single act of misconduct, a violation under this section must be made against an accident or health insurer.Witham v. ITT Hartford DBA Hartford Casualty, Superior Court, judicial district of Waterbury (June 4, 1997, Leheny, J.).

Accordingly, the defendants' motion to strike is granted.

ANGELA CAROL ROBINSON JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT

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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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 Having granted the motion to reargue and having reconsidered the arguments of the parties, this court changes its earlier ruling. The defendants' motion to strike the First Count of the plaintiff's Amended Complaint is granted. The plaintiff has filed an allegation based on a claimed violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 38a-816 (15). That count states a claim against the plaintiffs property and casualty insurer. Although a claim pursuant to § 38a-816 (15) of C.G.S. may be sustained with an allegation of a single act of misconduct, a violation under this section must be made against an accident or health insurer.Witham v. ITT Hartford DBA Hartford Casualty, Superior Court, judicial district of Waterbury (June 4, 1997, Leheny, J.).

Accordingly, the defendants' motion to strike is granted.

ANGELA CAROL ROBINSON JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 4085, 24 Conn. L. Rptr. 470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maloni-v-vermont-mutual-ins-co-no-cv98-0489281s-apr-29-1999-connsuperct-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack