Legal Opinion
Voris v. Molinaro
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 22, 2011No. SC 18435PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McLACHLAN, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether a claim for loss of consortium is barred by the settlement of the underlying negligence claim.1 We *793conclude that it is. The plaintiff2 John G. Voris appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the motion to strike by the defendant, Peter M. Molinaro.3 The plaintiff contends that: (1) a claim for loss of consortium may be maintained independently of the underlying injury claim; and (2) a settlement of the underlying injury claim does not bar the related claim for loss of consortium. We disagree, and affirm the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Oaks v. ConnorsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- State v. DeJesusSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Hopson v. St. Mary's HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Marri v. Stamford Street Railroad Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
- Izzo v. Colonial Penn InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. SteeleConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
- Gilman v. ShamesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019
- Amica Mutual Ins. Co. v. PiquetteConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. DuranteConnecticut Appellate Court · 2024
- Kelly Services, Inc. v. Senior Network, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2021
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.