Legal Opinion

Prescott v. City of Meriden

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided December 30, 2003No. AC 23556PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

FOTI, J.

The plaintiff1 Stephen Prescott appeals from the trial court’s judgment granting the defendants’2 motion for summary judgment in this personal injury action in which the plaintiff sustained an injury while attending a high school football game. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that he did not qualify for the identifiable person-imminent harm exception to the doctrine of governmental immunity. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The following facts and procedural history are relevant to the resolution of the plaintiffs appeal.3 On…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Shore v. Town of StoningtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  2. Burns v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  3. Purzycki v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  4. Tryon v. Town of North BranfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
  5. Colon v. Board of EducationConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Prescott v. City of MeridenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
  2. DeConti v. McGloneConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
  3. Navin v. Essex Savings BankConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
  4. Prescott v. City of MeridenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API