Nestico v. Weyman

59 A.3d 337, 140 Conn. App. 499, 2013 WL 238520, 2013 Conn. App. LEXIS 47
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided January 29, 2013·No. AC 33809·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case, the defendants, Brett A. Weyman and Connecticut Maxillofacial Surgeons, LLC, filed a motion to dismiss the dental malpractice action by the plaintiff, Leah Nestico, predicated on her alleged failure to comply with the requirements of General Statutes § 52-190a.1 After hearing argument thereon, the [500] court granted the motion to dismiss. The plaintiff now challenges the propriety of that determination in this appeal.

Our examination of the record and briefs and our consideration of the arguments of the parties persuade us that the judgment should be affirmed. On the facts of this case, the issues properly were resolved in the court’s complete and well reasoned memorandum of decision. See Nestico v. Weyman, 52 Conn. Sup. 463, 59 A.3d 338 (2011). We therefore adopt it as the proper statement of the relevant facts, issues and applicable law, as it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion contained therein. See Green v. DeFrank, 132 Conn. App. 331, 332, 33 A.3d 754 (2011).

The judgment is affirmed.

Footnotes

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

Nestico v. Weyman, 59 A.3d 337, 140 Conn. App. 499, 2013 WL 238520, 2013 Conn. App. LEXIS 47 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).

59 A.3d 337 (Nestico v. Weyman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Freeman v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2019
Labissoniere v. Gaylord Hospital, Inc.
185 A.3d 680 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2018)
Harnage v. Torres
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2015
Desteph v. Department of Banking
62 A.3d 634 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2013)
General Accident Insurance v. Mortara
62 A.3d 553 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2013)
Tuite v. Hospital of Central Connecticut
61 A.3d 1187 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2013)