Stotler v. Dep't of Transp.
| Decision Date | 25 July 2013 |
| Citation | 309 Conn. 921,76 A.3d 624 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | Ellen STOTLER, Administratrix (Estate of Paul A. Stotler III) v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. |
Eric P. Smith, in support of the petition.
Ronald D. Williams, Jr., Trumbull, in opposition.
The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 142 Conn.App. 826, 70 A.3d 114, is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the plaintiff's action should have been dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the allegations in the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a cause of action under the highway defect statute, General Statutes § 13a–144?”
McDONALD and ESPINOSA, Js., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
Stotler v. Dep't of Transp.
...because the allegations in the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a cause of action under ... § 13a–144?” Stotler v. Dept. of Transportation, 309 Conn. 921, 76 A.3d 624 (2013). We answer this question in the affirmative and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court. The fo......
-
Stotler v. Dep't of Transp.
...the allegations in the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a cause of action under . . . § 13a-144?" Stotler v. Dept. of Transportation, 309 Conn. 921, 76 A.3d 624 (2013). We answer this question in the affirmative and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court. The followin......