History
  • No items yet
midpage
Sackman v. Sullivan, No. Cv97 0159227 S (Aug. 29, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 11233
| Conn. Super. Ct. | 2002
|
Check Treatment

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
The court has reviewed the briefs of plaintiffs counsel dated July 10, 2002 and June 5, 2002 and defendant's counsel dated August 19, 2002 and June 10, 2002.

While the court understands the position of the defendant regarding the imbalance weighed in favor of a plaintiffs offer of judgment, nevertheless, the trial court is bound by the statute, § 52-192a and the decision of the Supreme Court interpreting the statute.

The trial court must reject the argument that interest should be calculated from the date that the culpable defendant was served, which was some time after the original complaint was served. See Lutynski v.B.B. J., Trucking, Inc., 229 Conn. 325 (1994), and Willow SpringsCondo. Assoc. Inc. v. Seventh BRT Development Corp., 245 Conn. 1 (1998). There is no exception for cited in parties such as the culpable defendant, the City of Stamford. Therefore, interest will be calculated from the date the original complaint was filed with the court.

So Ordered.

DOWNEY, J. CT Page 11234

Case Details

Case Name: Sackman v. Sullivan, No. Cv97 0159227 S (Aug. 29, 2002)
Court Name: Connecticut Superior Court
Date Published: Aug 29, 2002
Citation: 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 11233
Docket Number: No. CV97 0159227 S
Court Abbreviation: Conn. Super. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.