Hospital of Central Connecticut v. Neurosurgical Associates, P.C.
139 Conn. App. 778
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- The plaintiff Hospital of Central Connecticut sues Neurosurgical Associates, P.C. for unjust enrichment and statutory theft after paying for on‑call neurology coverage post‑termination.
- An agreement established on‑call coverage starting June 6, 2005, with a monthly fee of $8,333.33, renewed August 31, 2006 for one year and automatically thereafter.
- The plaintiff sent a termination notice on August 3, 2007, effective October 8, 2007, while the defendant’s physicians remained on the hospital staff.
- Payments continued for eight months post‑termination totaling $66,666.64, which the plaintiff sought to recoup.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant on both counts, concluding no unjust enrichment or theft actionable under the undisputed facts.
- The appellate court reverses the judgment as to unjust enrichment but affirms as to statutory theft.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unjust enrichment viability after termination | Plaintiff contends genuine issues exist about post‑termination benefits | Defendant asserts no unjust enrichment since services were provided for free or under claim of right | Unjust enrichment claim survives summary judgment |
| Statutory theft element of intent | Plaintiff asserts intent to deprive by continuing payments after termination | Defendant argues no intent to deprive; payments made under a belief of ongoing obligation | Statutory theft affirmed as to lack of proven intent to deprive |
Key Cases Cited
- Vertex, Inc. v. Waterbury, 278 Conn. 557 (Conn. 2006) (unjust enrichment standards and equitable remedies considered)
- Deming v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 279 Conn. 745 (Conn. 2006) (intent element distinguishes statutory theft from conversion)
- Lawson v. Whitey’s Frame Shop, 42 Conn. App. 599 (Conn. App. 1996) (intent to deprive must be proven for statutory theft; claim of right defenses discussed)
- Blackwell v. Mahmood, 120 Conn. App. 690 (Conn. App. 2010) (claim of right matters in statutory theft analysis)
- Gagnon v. Housatonic Valley Tourism District Commission, 92 Conn. App. 835 (Conn. App. 2006) (intent and factual predicates in summary judgment proceedings)