232 Conn.App. 733
Conn. App. Ct.2025Background
- Plaintiff Theresa Gibson sued Denmo’s Original Drive-In, LLC, alleging she sustained injuries from tripping over a defect on their premises, concealed by leaves and debris.
- She claimed Denmo’s had actual or constructive notice of the defect and was negligent in failing to warn or remedy the condition.
- The case was tried to a jury. Both sides agreed on a set of jury interrogatories, but due to an error, an older, unmodified version was given to the jury.
- The jury answered "no" to the first interrogatory (whether defendant failed to use reasonable care), ending deliberation and returning a defense verdict.
- Plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict, arguing the interrogatories precluded the jury from evaluating all elements of her claim; the trial court denied the motion, finding the error harmless.
- On appeal, the plaintiff challenged the court’s denial, focusing on the impact of the interrogatories given to the jury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the jury received proper interrogatories | Gibson: Incorrect interrogatories prevented full evaluation of her case | Denmo's: Interrogatories followed the law and pleadings; error was harmless | Interrogatories were consistent with pleadings/evidence; error harmless |
| Whether first interrogatory improperly disposed of case | Gibson: Directed jury to stop after one question, which did not address all allegations | Denmo's: Dispositive question on breach of duty was proper, as in all versions | First interrogatory articulated an essential element and was properly dispositive |
| Whether the error prejudiced the plaintiff | Gibson: Prevented jury from considering all alleged negligent acts | Denmo's: Jury would have reached same result with correct interrogatories | No harm found; outcome would have been same under either version |
| Whether plaintiff waived objection by not reviewing materials | Gibson: Harm arose from court’s error, not her conduct | Denmo's: Plaintiff waived objection by failing to review provided interrogatories before submission | Court did not need to rest on waiver; error was harmless on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Ulbrich v. Groth, 310 Conn. 375 (trial court has broad discretion in reviewing motions to set aside verdicts, abuse of discretion standard)
- Wilkins v. Connecticut Childbirth & Women’s Center, 176 Conn. App. 420 (jury interrogatories must be consistent with pleadings and evidence)
- Walencewicz v. Jealous Monk, LLC, 228 Conn. App. 349 (elements of premises liability: duty, breach, causation, injury)
- Martin v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Cos., 70 Conn. App. 250 (plaintiff must prove defendant had notice of defect)
- Klein v. Norwalk Hospital, 299 Conn. 241 (a finding on breach of duty may be dispositive without reaching other issues)
- Palmieri v. Stop & Shop Cos., 103 Conn. App. 121 (finding premises reasonably safe precludes finding of defect)