McGowan v. Aetna Casualty, No. 095455 (May 29, 1991)

Connecticut Superior Court

McGowan v. Aetna Casualty, No. 095455 (May 29, 1991)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 3788

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided May 29, 1991·No. No. 095455·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ORDER (re#124) After hearing held on defendant's motion to strike, it is hereby ORDERED:

The court adopts the finding of Judge Cioffi expressed in Clamage v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company,1 Conn. L. Rptr. 529, 530 (1990):

"The use of the word `defendant' in Jack v. Scanlon, [4 Conn. App. 451 (1990),] as well as the. . .legislative history of 14-295 indicates that the language `another party' as used in 14-295 refers to a party to the suit in which the injured party seeks damages. Therefore, the plaintiff's allegations of negligence, carelessness and statutory violations of [Oullette], who is not a party to the suit, do not entitle the plaintiff to demand double and treble damages from the defendant Aetna."

If the plaintiff has a right to the recovery of double or treble damages, it is by virtue of the language of 14-295 of the Statutes which, in the instant context, permits such recovery against the culpable "party", viz., Donna L. Oullette. Since Oullette is not a party to this action, the statute is inoperative, and no such recovery may be had against the named defendant.

The motion is granted.

GAFFNEY, 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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ORDER (re#124) After hearing held on defendant's motion to strike, it is hereby ORDERED:

The court adopts the finding of Judge Cioffi expressed in Clamage v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company,1 Conn. L. Rptr. 529, 530 (1990):

"The use of the word `defendant' in Jack v. Scanlon, [4 Conn. App. 451 (1990),] as well as the. . .legislative history of 14-295 indicates that the language `another party' as used in 14-295 refers to a party to the suit in which the injured party seeks damages. Therefore, the plaintiff's allegations of negligence, carelessness and statutory violations of [Oullette], who is not a party to the suit, do not entitle the plaintiff to demand double and treble damages from the defendant Aetna."

If the plaintiff has a right to the recovery of double or treble damages, it is by virtue of the language of 14-295 of the Statutes which, in the instant context, permits such recovery against the culpable "party", viz., Donna L. Oullette. Since Oullette is not a party to this action, the statute is inoperative, and no such recovery may be had against the named defendant.

The motion is granted.

GAFFNEY, J.

McGowan v. Aetna Casualty, No. 095455 (May 29, 1991), 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 3788 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 3788 (McGowan v. Aetna Casualty, No. 095455 (May 29, 1991)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related