Opinion
No. CV02-0174246S
June 7, 2005
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION TO STRIKE #102
Before the court is the defendant Christopher Lyons' motion to strike the Third Count of the plaintiff's complaint. This case involves an incident in which the plaintiff claims that he was injured when he stopped to assist a third person who was being either threatened or assaulted by three people, all of whom are named defendants. According to his allegations, the plaintiff was struck in the face by a hard object swung by defendant Carlos Machados. In the third count of the complaint, which is based on "negligence and/or civil conspiracy," the plaintiff alleges that his injuries were caused by the negligence and carelessness of the defendant Christopher Lyons in that he "alone and/or in concert with the [other defendants] conspired to threaten, scare and/or assault [another party] when he knew and or should have known that such misconduct could, and did, escalate to involve and injure other people, including the plaintiff." The defendant claims that the claim against him is legally insufficient because there are no allegations that he assaulted the plaintiff and because the plaintiff does not allege sufficient facts to sustain such a claim.
"In ruling on a motion to strike, the court must accept as true the facts alleged in the [complaint] and construe them in the manner most favorable to sustaining their legal sufficiency." Connecticut National Bank v. Douglas, 221 Conn. 530, 536, 606 A.2d 684 (1992).
"The contours of a civil action for conspiracy are: (1) a combination between two or more persons, (2) to do a criminal or an unlawful act or a lawful act by criminal or unlawful means, (3) an act done by one or more of the conspirators pursuant to the scheme and in furtherance of the object, (4) which act results in damage to the plaintiff." (Citations omitted.) Litchfield Asset Management Corp. v. Howell, 70 Conn.App. 133, CT Page 9796 139-40, 799 A.2d 298 (2002). Based on a review of the allegations in the complaint, the court finds that the plaintiff has sufficiently set forth a cause of action for civil conspiracy.
The defendant cites Dumais v. Hartford Roman Catholic, 2002 Ct. Sup. 9774, 32 Conn. L. Rptr. 693 (Jul. 31, 2002), for the proposition that "it is inadequate to aver that a group of persons agreed to perform certain other acts but not the injurious conduct which harmed the plaintiff." Id. In this case, the allegations are that the defendants agreed to perform certain acts which did injure the plaintiff.
For reasons stated herein, the motion to strike is denied.
GALLAGHER, J.