Zimmerman v. Zografidis, No. Cv93 0129111 (Aug. 12, 1996)

Connecticut Superior Court

Zimmerman v. Zografidis, No. Cv93 0129111 (Aug. 12, 1996)

1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5256-BBBBBB

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided August 12, 1996·No. No. CV93 0129111·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (#121) is denied as there are genuine issues of fact regarding contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff Christy, raised by the defendants' special defense. The affidavit filed by the plaintiff only avers that the defendant operator made an improper left turn.

It is true, that the defendants did not file a counter affidavit opposing summary judgment, but failure to do so does not bar a party "from attacking the sufficiency of the movant's affidavit and other proof." McGillicuddy v. Ciga Plus, 7 CSCR 323 (1992), citing Evans Products Co. v. Clinton Building Supply,Inc., 174 Conn. 512, 514-18, 391 A.2d 168 (1984).

Further, "[b]y contesting the existence of only one material fact, the existence of which is not conclusive on the merits of the entire case, a party moving for summary judgment cannot place on the other party the burden of submitting affidavits to establish the truth of other pleaded material facts which the moving party has not attacked. Plouffe v. New York, 160 Conn. 482, 491,280 A.2d 359 (1971).

So Ordered.

Dated at Stamford, Connecticut, this 12th day of August, 1996.

WILLIAM BURKE LEWIS, 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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (#121) is denied as there are genuine issues of fact regarding contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff Christy, raised by the defendants' special defense. The affidavit filed by the plaintiff only avers that the defendant operator made an improper left turn.

It is true, that the defendants did not file a counter affidavit opposing summary judgment, but failure to do so does not bar a party "from attacking the sufficiency of the movant's affidavit and other proof." McGillicuddy v. Ciga Plus, 7 CSCR 323 (1992), citing Evans Products Co. v. Clinton Building Supply,Inc., 174 Conn. 512, 514-18, 391 A.2d 168 (1984).

Further, "[b]y contesting the existence of only one material fact, the existence of which is not conclusive on the merits of the entire case, a party moving for summary judgment cannot place on the other party the burden of submitting affidavits to establish the truth of other pleaded material facts which the moving party has not attacked. Plouffe v. New York, 160 Conn. 482, 491,280 A.2d 359 (1971).

So Ordered.

Dated at Stamford, Connecticut, this 12th day of August, 1996.

WILLIAM BURKE LEWIS, J.

Zimmerman v. Zografidis, No. Cv93 0129111 (Aug. 12, 1996), 1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5256-BBBBBB (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5256-BBBBBB (Zimmerman v. Zografidis, No. Cv93 0129111 (Aug. 12, 1996)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related