Sullins v. Allen, No. Cv95 0143781 S (Jun. 17, 1997)

1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 6496
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided June 17, 1997·No. No. CV95 0143781 S·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (#121) The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (#121) as to the defendants' "cross-claim" [counterclaim] for indemnification, on the ground that no independent legal relationship existed between the defendants and Judith Sullins, is denied without prejudice to renewal. Contrary to the holding in Atkinson v. Berloni,23 Conn. App. 325, 327-28, 580 A.2d 84 (1990), outside the context of workers' compensation law, a party "need not establish the existence of an independent legal relationship between itself and the alleged indemnitor as a condition for recovery on the basis of a common law claim for indemnity." Skuzinski v. Bouchard Fuels,Inc., 240 Conn. 694, 701-02, ___ A.2d ___ (1997). Because the present case is outside the context of workers' compensation law, the defendant need not establish an independent legal relationship.

NADEAU, J.

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

Sullins v. Allen, No. Cv95 0143781 S (Jun. 17, 1997), 1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 6496 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997).

1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 6496 (Sullins v. Allen, No. Cv95 0143781 S (Jun. 17, 1997)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Skuzinski v. Bouchard Fuels, Inc.
694 A.2d 788 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1997)
Atkinson v. Berloni
580 A.2d 84 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1990)