The third-party defendant has now moved for a Summary Judgment asserting that there is no genuine issue of material fact, that he is not personally liable in as much as he did not commit or participate in the commission of the alleged tort. The third-party defendant has filed an affidavit stating that, at the time the injuries received by the plaintiff, Robert Comfort was president of Contemporary Property Management, Inc. which was managing the property in which the plaintiff was a tenant; that Contemporary Property Management hired a property manager who was actually managing the property employed; and that an independent contractor was hired to handle the maintenance responsibilities. The affidavit further states that at no time was Robert Comfort personally involved in the day to day maintenance of the premises.
The third-party plaintiff has not filed any affidavit with respect to the Motion for Summary Judgment but asserts that the contract between Washington and Temporary Property Management, Inc. is sufficient to present a factual issue because it provides that the contract will be performed under the personal and direct supervision of one of its officers.
The contract was signed by the third-party defendant, Robert Comfort, as president, and accordingly he did not assume any personal obligations under the contract. The obligations under the contract are imposed upon Contemporary and there are no provisions in the contract requiring the third-party defendant, as an individual, to perform any tasks relating to plaintiff's claim. An officer of a corporation does not incur personal liability for the torts of the corporation merely because of his official position. An officer of a corporation, may, however, incur liability if the officer participates in the commission of a tort. Scribner v. O'Brien, Inc.
The third-party plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that a CT Page 2419 factual question exists with respect to a personal duty imposed on the third-party defendant or that the third-party defendant undertook to perform any functions. The third-party plaintiff has also failed to controvert, by affidavit or otherwise, any of the facts set forth in the affidavit submitted on behalf of the third-party defendant and the court is, therefore, entitled to rely upon the facts as stated. Fogarty v. Rashaw,
Accordingly, the Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.
RUSH, JUDGE
