Legal Opinion

Gargano v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority

Mohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court

Decided June 5, 2013No. GDTC-T-10-115-PMGPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

GUERNSEY, C.J.

In the instant action Plaintiff seeks damages under The Mohegan Torts Code, MTC § 3-241 et seq., for injuries allegedly sustained in a fall in a ladies’ restroom in the Sky Casino. The Defendant has moved for summary judgment on grounds that “[bjeeause there can be no evidence of constructive notice of a specific defect, no genuine issue of material fact exists.”1 The basis for its contention that no evidence of constructive notice is possible is Plaintiffs admission in deposition testimony that she did not know…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Morris v. King Cole Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1946
  2. Collum v. ChapinConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
  3. Kelly v. Stop & Shop, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
  4. Allstate Insurance v. BarronSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
  5. Fisher v. Big Y Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Galazka v. Jump Higher Connecticut, LLCMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API