Watts v. Chittenden

981 A.2d 1077, 293 Conn. 932, 2009 Conn. LEXIS 468
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedOctober 8, 2009
DocketSC 18474
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 981 A.2d 1077 (Watts v. Chittenden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Watts v. Chittenden, 981 A.2d 1077, 293 Conn. 932, 2009 Conn. LEXIS 468 (Colo. 2009).

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 115 Conn. App. 404 (AC 29626), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Whether the Appellate Court, based on the record before it, properly reversed the trial court’s decision by holding that the existence of an original duty must be determined before applying the continuing course of conduct doctrine to toll the statute of limitations in a nonnegligence cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress?
“2. Assuming that the Appellate Court held that the existence of an original duty must be determined before applying the continuing course of conduct doctrine, [933]*933whether that court properly determined that there was no duty in this case?”
The Supreme Court docket number is SC 18474. James F. Sullivan, in support of the petition. Michael S. Hillis, in opposition. Decided October 8, 2009

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

Related

Watts v. Chittenden
22 A.3d 1214 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
981 A.2d 1077, 293 Conn. 932, 2009 Conn. LEXIS 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watts-v-chittenden-conn-2009.