St. Pierre v. Town of Plainfield
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtRogers, C.J.
The issue raised in this appeal is whether municipal immunity is abrogated by either the proprietary function exception of General Statutes § 52- 557n 1 or the identifiable person, imminent harm exception. Specifically, we must decide whether there is municipal immunity when a town charges a nominal fee to a private group for reserved use of a public pool and an individual group member slips and falls on accumulated water in the vicinity of that pool. The plaintiff, David L. St. Pierre, appeals from the judgment rendered in favor of the named defendant, the town of Plainfield, 2 after…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Evon v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Sestito v. City of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Considine v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Doe v. PetersenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Grady v. Town of SomersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Brooks v. PowersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
- Crismale v. WalstonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- Francini v. Goodspeed Airport, LLCSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
- Buehler v. NewtownConnecticut Appellate Court · 2021
- Brooks v. PowersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.