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