Watrous v. Williamson, No. 561641 (Feb. 11, 2003)

Connecticut Superior Court

Watrous v. Williamson, No. 561641 (Feb. 11, 2003)

2003 Conn. Super. Ct. 2264

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedFebruary 11, 2003

DocketNo. 561641

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2003 Conn. Super. Ct. 2264 (Watrous v. Williamson, No. 561641 (Feb. 11, 2003)) 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

Watrous v. Williamson, No. 561641 (Feb. 11, 2003), 2003 Conn. Super. Ct. 2264 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT The plaintiff moves to amend the complaint, which alleges one count of negligence. The original complaint names only one defendant, Larry Williamson, and alleges that the defendant was operating a motor vehicle that was involved in a collision with the plaintiff's motor vehicle. The plaintiff moves to amend the complaint to allege that Rebecca Williamson, the daughter and agent of the defendant, was operating the motor vehicle. She was not mentioned in the original complaint.

"It is proper to amplify or expand what has already been alleged in support of a cause of action, provided the identity of the cause of action remains substantially the same, but where an entirely new and different factual situation is presented, a new and different cause of action is stated." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Gurliacci v.Mayer, 218 Conn. 531, 547, 590 A.2d 914 (1991). The changes proposed by the plaintiff present a new factual scenario: one in which the role of the defendant is changed from owner to operator, and poses theories of agency.

Since this does not relate back to the original complaint, the request to amend must be denied.

D. Michael Hurley

Judge Trial Referee CT Page 2265

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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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 RE MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT The plaintiff moves to amend the complaint, which alleges one count of negligence. The original complaint names only one defendant, Larry Williamson, and alleges that the defendant was operating a motor vehicle that was involved in a collision with the plaintiff's motor vehicle. The plaintiff moves to amend the complaint to allege that Rebecca Williamson, the daughter and agent of the defendant, was operating the motor vehicle. She was not mentioned in the original complaint.

"It is proper to amplify or expand what has already been alleged in support of a cause of action, provided the identity of the cause of action remains substantially the same, but where an entirely new and different factual situation is presented, a new and different cause of action is stated." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Gurliacci v.Mayer, 218 Conn. 531, 547, 590 A.2d 914 (1991). The changes proposed by the plaintiff present a new factual scenario: one in which the role of the defendant is changed from owner to operator, and poses theories of agency.

Since this does not relate back to the original complaint, the request to amend must be denied.

D. Michael Hurley

Judge Trial Referee CT Page 2265

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2003 Conn. Super. Ct. 2264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watrous-v-williamson-no-561641-feb-11-2003-connsuperct-2003.

Opinion

D. Michael Hurley

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack