Burke v. Mesniaeff, 173 A.3d 393

Background

Elizabeth Burke sued her ex-husband Gregory Mesniaeff for assault and battery and related torts after he physically removed her from a house in Sharon during a public tour; trial resulted in a jury finding intentional assault and battery and causation but concluding the defendant proved justification and defense of others.
The Sharon house was titled in Mesniaeff’s name; the parties were married at the time of the incident and disputed whether Burke had a right to be there; guests feared Burke’s behavior when she entered yelling and confronting the defendant.
Mesniaeff’s amended answer asserted multiple special defenses (justification, self-defense, defense of others, wrongful conduct) and repeatedly alleged Burke was trespassing; Burke filed a general denial but did not move to strike or request revision of those defenses.
At trial the court instructed the jury on justification (including an example using criminal trespass), self-defense, defense of others, and wrongful conduct; jury interrogatories asked specifically whether plaintiff’s recovery was barred by those defenses.
The jury found for the defendant: defendant’s conduct was intentional assault/battery and a substantial factor in causing injuries, but plaintiff’s recovery was barred by justification and defense of others (but not by wrongful conduct or self-defense).
Plaintiff appealed arguing (1) the trespass/criminal statute-based instruction was improper because a spouse cannot trespass on marital property and the statute wasn’t pled by number, (2) the court erred by omitting duty-to-retreat and mere-words doctrines, and (3) insufficiency of evidence for defense-of-others; the court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether charging jury with criminal trespass as part of justification was improper because spouse cannot trespass on marital property	Burke: as codweller or spouse she could not legally trespass; including trespass misled jury	Mesniaeff: trespass was pleaded repeatedly; title in his name and evidence supported claim; plaintiff had notice	Court: harmless or not misleading — jury rejected wrongful-conduct/trespass as basis; therefore no prejudice from trespass language
Whether defendant had to plead the statute number for statute-based special defense	Burke: Practice Book §10-3(a) requires citing statute number; defendant failed to do so	Mesniaeff: pleadings and trial evidence put plaintiff on notice; failure to cite statute is directory	Court: rule is directory; plaintiff had notice and did not move to strike; no prejudice shown
Whether court should have instructed duty to retreat / mere-words doctrine	Burke: as codweller defendant had duty-to-retreat; mere words cannot justify force	Mesniaeff: no deadly force at issue; retreat rule inapplicable; mere-words not requested at trial	Court: duty-to-retreat applies only to deadly force; not implicated here; mere-words claim not preserved so not reviewed
Whether evidence was sufficient to support defense-of-others justification	Burke: insufficient objective basis to believe guests faced imminent harm; force was excessive	Mesniaeff: guests were frightened, defendant reasonably believed they were in danger; he used proportionate force to escort Burke out	Court: under deferential sufficiency standard, evidence (guest fear, shouting, attempts to return to house, testimony that guests feared a weapon) permitted jury to find defense-of-others reasonable; verdict sustained

Key Cases Cited

Opotzner v. Bass, 63 Conn. App. 555 (instructional-review standard and charge-read-as-a-whole principles)
Gaudio v. Griffin Health Services Corp., 249 Conn. 523 (standards for sufficiency of evidence review)
State v. Bryan, 307 Conn. 823 (defense-of-others explained as a justification; reasonableness inquiry)
State v. James, 54 Conn. App. 26 (dwelling exception to duty-to-retreat; co-dweller limitation)
Colon v. Board of Education, 60 Conn. App. 178 (Practice Book §10-3(a) construed as directory rather than mandatory)