From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Lach

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Apr 19, 1983
457 A.2d 1079 (Conn. 1983)

Opinion

(10577)

Argued March 3, 1983

Decision released April 19, 1983

Action for recovery of costs incurred for treatment and services rendered to the defendant's decedent, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Hartford-New Britain at Hartford and tried to the court, Bernstein, J.; judgment for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed to this court. No error.

William C. Galligan, for the appellant (defendant).

Christina G. Dunnell, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, was Joseph I. Lieberman, attorney general, for the appellee (plaintiff).


This appeal by the defendant administrator of the estate of Irvin P. Hyatt challenges the judgment below that, pursuant to General Statutes 27-108, the plaintiff recover of the defendant for the cost of "medical care and treatment, food and clothing" furnished to the decedent while he resided at the Veterans' Home and Hospital in Rocky Hill between October 1957 and April 1976. The claims here are substantially identical to those made by the defendant in State v. Egan, 169 Conn. 78, 83-84, 362 A.2d 516 (1975), which is dispositive of this appeal.

The defendant's special defense of the statute of limitations was properly rejected by the trial court because the state's claim was timely pursuant to 17-298 of the General Statutes. Furthermore, although the defendant also argues in his brief that the per diem charges assessed against the estate exceeded the permissible statutory limits, that claim has not been properly presented for our review.


Summaries of

State v. Lach

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Apr 19, 1983
457 A.2d 1079 (Conn. 1983)
Case details for

State v. Lach

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. WALDEMAR J. LACH, ADMINISTRATOR (ESTATE OF IRVIN…

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Apr 19, 1983

Citations

457 A.2d 1079 (Conn. 1983)
457 A.2d 1079

Citing Cases

State v. Stengel

Both parties had agreed, by written stipulation, to waive the normal time period for rendition of a judgment…