Carsetti v. Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise, (2020)

• Decision Date: 04 March 2020
• Docket Number: MPTC-CV-PI-2018-177
• Parties: JOHN CARSETTI v. MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT GAMING ENTERPRISE
• Court: Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Court

JOHN CARSETTI v. MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT GAMING ENTERPRISE

No. MPTC-CV-PI-2018-177

Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Court

March 4, 2020

M Joseph Strafaci, Esq., for the Plaintiff

Edward W. Gasser, Esq., for the Defendant

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

Thomas J. Londregan, Judge.

I.BACKGROUND

The plaintiff, John Carsetti, filed this one-count complaint against the defendant, Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise(hereinafter "the Gaming Enterprise"), on September 14, 2018, alleging that he sustained injuries as a result of the defendant's negligence.On September 22, 2017, he was in attendance at a concert at the Fox Theater.The plaintiff asserts that at the end of the concert a stage hand was dropping Sammy Hagar & the Circle commemorative guitar picks at the edge of the stage for fans to pick up.As the plaintiff was slapping his hand over one of the picks he was allegedly grabbed around the neck and pulled back from the stage by a security officer employed by the defendant.At a two-day trial that occurred on January 22, 2020 and February 5, 2020, the Court heard testimony from the plaintiff and Security Events Manager for the defendant, William Soriano.At the conclusion of the trial, the parties elected to make their closing arguments orally.

II.DISCUSSION

The essential elements of a cause of action in negligence are well established.In order for the plaintiff to prevail, they must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that (1)the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff; (2) that the defendant breached said duty; (3) that the breach was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries; and (4) that the plaintiff suffered actual damages.Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation v. Castellucci & Assoc., Inc., 4 Mash.Rep. 21, 33(2002);Hazard v. Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise, 6 Mash.Rep. 354, 357-58(2016).

In this case, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant breached the duty that it owed to him as an invitee of its premises by allowing its security officers to use force which was excessive and unreasonable.He asserts that the security officers failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry before resorting to force, that the security officers were improperly trained and supervised, and that the defendant failed to establish proper policies and procedures for its security officers.The defendant asserts that any of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff were caused by his own carelessness and negligence in that he caused and/or escalated a confrontation with a patron, which required involvement of its security officers.

A.Credibility

There are competing accounts of the incident.According to the plaintiff, after Sammy Hagar & the Circle finished their set a stage hand was dropping commemorative guitar picksat the edge of the stage for fans to grab.The plaintiff testified that there was a college-aged man to his right jostling with him to get a pick.The plaintiff alleges that he and the college-aged man were both slapping at the same pick when he suddenly felt someone wrap their arm around his neck, lift him up into the air, and drop him to the ground.The plaintiff claims that his neck and shoulders were immediately in pain.He claims that the individual who picked him up and dropped him was a security officer employed by the defendant.

Statements and testimony from security personnel differ from the plaintiff's testimony on a number of crucial points.At trial the Court finds that William Soriano, Events Security Manager for the defendant, testified credibly about what he personally observed.He testified that he was working in the Fox Theater the night of the alleged incident.He was standing near the edge of stage right to prevent any stage breach while fans asked for memorabilia.Mr. Soriano noticeda stage hand throw a pick underhand directly to a young boy and his father.He testified that he was approximately 20 feet away from the incident.As the boy placed his hand over the pick Mr. Soriano witnessed the plaintiff begin to jostle the boy and slap at his hand in what appeared to be an attempt to obtain the pick himself.Mr. Soriano saw Security Officer Valladares and Security Supervisor Moore approach the plaintiff.Mr. Valladares separated the plaintiff from the child by putting his body between the two of them.He extended his arms perpendicular to the ground and held them outstretched so as to create more distance between the plaintiff and himself.As Mr. Moore and Valladares ushered the plaintiff away from the stage he became angry and started to yell at them.

"In bench trials, the judge serves as the sole fact-finder and, thus, assumes the role of the jury.In this capacity, the judge's function includes weighing the evidence, evaluating the credibility of witnesses, and deciding questions of fact, as well as issues of law."Citron v. Wachovia Mortgage Corp., 922 F.Supp.2d 1309, 1314(M.D.Fla.2013)."Where the cause is tried to the court, the resolution of conflicting evidence is solely within the province of the court.Its findings must be given great weight in light of the fact that it had the opportunity to hear and observe the witnesses."Ahern v. Veterans Administration, 537 F.2d 1098, 1101(1976)."It is . . . exclusively within the province of the trier of fact to draw reasonable inferences from the facts and to resolve conflicts in the evidence."Steiner Corp. v. Johnson & Higgins of California, 118 F.Supp.2d 1174, 1184(D.Utah2000).

During the trial, the Court had ample opportunity to observe the conduct, demeanor and attitude of the plaintiff as a witness to evaluate his testimony, and to relate his testimony to the exhibits admitted into evidence.When weighing the evidence, the Court considered the ability of...