Di Teresi v. Stamford Health System, Inc.
149 Conn. App. 502
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- In March 2004, 92‑year‑old Santina Di Terisi, a dementia patient at Stamford Hospital, was sexually assaulted by a certified nurse’s assistant.
- Hospital staff interrupted the assault, cleaned the scene, questioned the assistant, and delayed informing Santina’s family and primary physician until hours later; a rape kit was performed that evening.
- Santina’s daughter, Virginia, observed her mother was agitated before learning of the assault; plaintiffs allege inadequate post‑assault care and delayed reporting to police and family.
- Plaintiffs sued Stamford Health System (among others) asserting multiple counts including a CUTPA claim alleging an ascertainable loss of money or property stemming from emotional distress and the hospital’s conduct.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant on the CUTPA count, concluding there was no monetary or physical loss and emotional distress alone did not satisfy CUTPA’s ascertainable loss requirement.
- The Appellate Court affirmed, holding emotional distress by itself is not an ascertainable loss under CUTPA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether emotional distress alone constitutes an "ascertainable loss of money or property" under CUTPA | Emotional distress from the hospital’s conduct is an ascertainable loss measurable under CUTPA (relying on liberal construction and Hinchliffe) | No ascertainable loss: plaintiffs suffered no monetary loss or physical injury; emotional distress alone is not within CUTPA’s threshold | Emotional distress alone is not an ascertainable loss under CUTPA; summary judgment for defendant affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Hinchliffe v. American Motors Corp., 184 Conn. 607, 440 A.2d 810 (1981) (explains CUTPA’s ascertainable loss concept and gives example of measurable expectation of product benefits)
- Artie’s Auto Body, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 287 Conn. 208, 947 A.2d 320 (2008) (defines ascertainable loss as a loss capable of being discovered, observed or established)
- Santorso v. Bristol Hospital, 308 Conn. 338, 63 A.3d 940 (2013) (summary judgment standards and evidentiary burdens on opposeing party)
- D’Angelo Development & Construction Corp. v. Cordovano, 121 Conn. App. 165, 995 A.2d 79 (2010) (reiterates CUTPA requires an ascertainable loss of money or property)