From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Middlesex Mutual Assurance v. Fritz

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New Haven at New Haven
Aug 8, 2002
2002 Ct. Sup. 10059 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2002)

Opinion

No. CV 01 0447194 S

August 8, 2002


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT'S JURY CLAIM


The plaintiff, Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co., is seeking a declaratory judgment to determine whether it has a duty to defend and indemnify one of the defendants, Gerald Casiello, under a homeowner's liability insurance policy. The named defendant, Lisa Fritz, is the plaintiff in an underlying action in which she alleges intentional assault and battery; wanton, wilful and malicious assault and battery; intentional infliction of emotional distress; negligent infliction of emotional distress; and negligence against Casiello. Casiello has claimed a trial by jury, and Middlesex has filed an objection.

Declaratory judgment actions frequently have been used to determine whether an insurer has a duty to defend and indemnify its insured. See Holy Triniy Church of God in Christ v. Aetna Casualty Surety Co., 214 Conn. 216, 217, 581 A.2d 107 (1990).

General Statutes § 52-215 states in pertinent part that "[a]llissues of fact in any such case shall be tried by the jury. . . ." (Emphasis added.) "[T]he construction of an insurance contract presents a question of law. See Peerless Ins. Co. v. Gonzalez, 241 Conn. 476, 483, 697 A.2d 680 (1997). Moreover, [u]nlike certain other contracts . . . where . . . the intent of the parties and thus the meaning of the contract is a factual question subject to limited appellate review . . . construction of a contract of insurance presents a question of law . . . which this court reviews de novo. Imperial Casualty Indemnity Co. v. State, 246 Conn. 313, 325, 714 A.2d 1230 (1998)." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wallingford v. Reliance Ins. Co., Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven, Docket No. CV 99 0420955 (January 13, 2000, Silbert, J.).

The plaintiff's objection to Casiello's jury claim is therefore sustained.

Jonathan E. Silbert, Judge


Summaries of

Middlesex Mutual Assurance v. Fritz

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New Haven at New Haven
Aug 8, 2002
2002 Ct. Sup. 10059 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2002)
Case details for

Middlesex Mutual Assurance v. Fritz

Case Details

Full title:MIDDLESEX MUTUAL ASSURANCE CO. v. LISA A. FRITZ AND GERALD B. CASIELLO

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

Date published: Aug 8, 2002

Citations

2002 Ct. Sup. 10059 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2002)

Citing Cases

Gratz v. Insurance Co. of N. A.

Errors assigned were various rulings and instructions, quoting record. Horace Michener Schell, with him…

Chauvin v. Superior Fire Ins. Co.

The parties must make an honest effort to secure an award. The assured, in the absence of legal reasons,…