From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beyer v. McDonald

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New London at New London
Jan 23, 2004
2004 Ct. Sup. 840 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2004)

Opinion

No. 566031

January 23, 2004


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION TO STRIKE


The recent case of Matthiessen v. Vanech, 266 Conn. 822 (2003), holds that Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec 52-183 does not abrogate the common-law rule that the owner of a motor vehicle is not vicariously liable for punitive damages resulting from the operator's reckless operation of the vehicle. In addition, it is clear that Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec. 52-182 does not create substantive rights. Hunt v. Richter, 163 Conn. 84, 89-90 (1972). See also the newly revised Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec 14-295, effective October 1, 2003.

The motion to strike is granted as to Counts Five and Six and their corresponding prayers for relief.

ELAINE GORDON, JUDGE


Summaries of

Beyer v. McDonald

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New London at New London
Jan 23, 2004
2004 Ct. Sup. 840 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2004)
Case details for

Beyer v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:ELIZABETH BEYER v. STEVEN J. McDONALD ET AL

Court:Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New London at New London

Date published: Jan 23, 2004

Citations

2004 Ct. Sup. 840 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2004)

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Cassetti

And lastly, the majority of decisions rendered subsequent to this amendment and Matthiessen have precluded…