Legal Opinion
Pintavalle v. Valkanos
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 6, 1990No. 13964PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCallahan, J.
The sole issue in this appeal is the proper interpretation of General Statutes § 52-592, the accidental failure of suit statute.1 The trial court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the plaintiff did not comply with the limitation provisions of General Statutes § 52-5842 and that the provisions of § 52-592 (a) were not applicable and could not save the plaintiff’s suit from being time barred. The plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Court, and we transferred the matter to this court pursuant to Practice Book § 4023. We agree with the trial court’s…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hayes v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Lacasse v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Finkenstein v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation ActSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Jones v. Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
- Isaac v. Mount Sinai HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Kilduff v. Adams, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Bridgeport Hospital v. Commission on Human Rights & OpportunitiesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Westport Taxi Service, Inc. v. Westport Transit DistrictSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Figueroa v. C & S Ball BearingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Giaimo v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.