New England Hlth. Emp. v. Jablonski, No. Cv95 0146030 S (Oct. 12, 1995)

Connecticut Superior Court

New England Hlth. Emp. v. Jablonski, No. Cv95 0146030 S (Oct. 12, 1995)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 11301

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedOctober 12, 1995

DocketNo. CV95 0146030 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 11301 (New England Hlth. Emp. v. Jablonski, No. Cv95 0146030 S (Oct. 12, 1995)) 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

New England Hlth. Emp. v. Jablonski, No. Cv95 0146030 S (Oct. 12, 1995), 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 11301 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION CT Page 11302 In his second special defense, the defendant alleges that he is entitled to a reduction in the amount of any award to the plaintiff by any collateral source payments pursuant to General Statutes § 52-225a.

Practice Book § 195A provides that "[n]o pleading shall contain any allegations regarding receipt by a party of collateral source payments as described in Conn. Gen. Stat. §§52-225a and 52-225b." See Neary v. McCarthy, Superior Court, judicial district of Litchfield, Docket No. 063412 (February 2, 1995, Pickett, J.). See also Mullins v. Tuccinardi, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of Stamford/Norwalk at Stamford, Docket No. 121700 (June 24, 1993, Lewis, J.) (holding that a collateral source payment was not a valid special defense because collateral source payment reductions are undertaken after damages are awarded and such a defense did not show that the plaintiff had no cause of action); Jeffreys v. Bombassei,8 CSCR 261 (February 3, 1993, Jones, J.); Kelly v. Reynolds, 8 CSCR 728 (January 5, 1993, Leheny, J.).

The motion to strike the defendant's second special defense which alleges collateral source payment is granted.

D'ANDREA, 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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION CT Page 11302 In his second special defense, the defendant alleges that he is entitled to a reduction in the amount of any award to the plaintiff by any collateral source payments pursuant to General Statutes § 52-225a.

Practice Book § 195A provides that "[n]o pleading shall contain any allegations regarding receipt by a party of collateral source payments as described in Conn. Gen. Stat. §§52-225a and 52-225b." See Neary v. McCarthy, Superior Court, judicial district of Litchfield, Docket No. 063412 (February 2, 1995, Pickett, J.). See also Mullins v. Tuccinardi, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of Stamford/Norwalk at Stamford, Docket No. 121700 (June 24, 1993, Lewis, J.) (holding that a collateral source payment was not a valid special defense because collateral source payment reductions are undertaken after damages are awarded and such a defense did not show that the plaintiff had no cause of action); Jeffreys v. Bombassei,8 CSCR 261 (February 3, 1993, Jones, J.); Kelly v. Reynolds, 8 CSCR 728 (January 5, 1993, Leheny, J.).

The motion to strike the defendant's second special defense which alleges collateral source payment is granted.

D'ANDREA, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 11301, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/new-england-hlth-emp-v-jablonski-no-cv95-0146030-s-oct-12-1995-connsuperct-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack