Opinion
No. CV 06-5000542.
December 12, 2006.
MEMORANDUM
On May 2, 2006, the plaintiff filed a breach of contract action against the defendant, the Board of Education for Regional School District No. 14. On June 28, 2006 the defendant, pursuant to Practice Book §§ 10-31(2), (4) and (5), moved to dismiss the complaint. On October 17, 2006 the plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition to the motion to dismiss. The court heard argument on October 30, 2006.
The defendant's argument is that the defendant is a regional school district and, as such, service must be made in accordance with Connecticut General Statute § 52-57(b)(4), that the service in this case was made upon the Town Clerk of Woodbury in accordance with Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-57(b)(5), and that, due to this defective service, the court lacks jurisdiction over this action. The plaintiff's opposition memorandum argues that service was proper because the defendant in this action is the Board of Education for the Regional School District. The plaintiff, in her memorandum, points out that the title of the contract in question is "Agreement Between the Regional School District Board of Education and the Nonnewaug Administrator's Group" and that the contract in question is signed by the Chairman of the Board of Education. The State Marshal's return dated April 19, 2006, recites that service was made upon the " Board of Education, Regional School District #14 by leaving a true attested copy of the Original Writ, Summons and Complaint, with my doings hereon endorsed, with and in the hands of: Judy Ryan, Assistant Town Clerk, Town of Woodbury, 275 Main Street South, Woodbury, Ct., One such copy for each of the within named."
Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-57(b) reads, "Process in civil actions against the following described classes of defendants shall be served as follows: (4) against a school district, upon its clerk or one of its committee."
Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-57(b) reads, "Process in civil actions against the following described defendants shall be served as follows: (5) against a board, commission, department or agency of a town, city or borough, notwithstanding any provision of law, upon the clerk of the town, city or borough, provided two copies of such process shall be served upon the clerk and the clerk shall retain one copy and forward the second copy to the board, commission, department or agency."
See Exhibit A attached to the plaintiff's memorandum in opposition.
See page 10 of Exhibit A attached to plaintiff's memorandum.
General Statutes § 52-57(b) provides, in relevant part, that: "Process . . . shall be served as follows . . . (4) against a school district, upon its clerk or one of its committee; (5) against a board, commission, department or agency of a town, city or borough, notwithstanding any provisions of law, upon the clerk of the town, city or borough . . ." The issue of service of process on a board of education for a regional school district has not been squarely addressed at the appellate level.
In the present case, the school district is not named as a defendant. The allegation arises from a breach of an agreement made by the board of education; not through any supervision of the students at a regional school district. Section 52-57(b)(4) specifically says that: "Process . . . shall be served . . . (4) against a school district, upon its clerk or one of its committee." General Statutes §§ 10-56 and 10-241 provide that: "a regional school district" and "each school district," respectively, "shall be a body politic and corporate with power to sue and be sued." Since the school district can be sued separately from its board of education, the court finds that § 52-57(b)(4) governs only service of process on the school district. Section 52-57(b)(5) is the statute governing service of process on the board of education for a regional school district.
It is also important to note that § 52-57(b)(5) has built in procedural safeguards to ensure that the board would get notice even though, under this subsection, service could go to the clerk of one of several towns in a region. See § 52-57(b)(5) (requiring that, when the town clerk is served, "two copies of such process shall be served upon the clerk and the clerk shall . . . forward the second copy to the board . . .").
The court finds that since the named defendant is the Board of Education and that the contract in dispute is between the Board of Education for Regional School District #14 and the plaintiff's Administrators Group, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-57(b)(5) is the controlling statute. Since service was accomplished in accordance with § 52-57(b)(5), the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied.