Katherine Chapman v. Franklin Herren (2010)

ORDER Motion No. 144

On June 24, 2010, the court, Cosgrove, J., entered an order granting the defendant Camrac's motion for summary judgment [50 Conn. L. Rptr. 228].   On July 13, 2010, the plaintiff filed a motion for reargument and reconsideration on the ground that she was not provided proper or sufficient time to address the issue of whether or not the defendant rental car company owed a duty to the plaintiff to investigate a renter's driving record.   While the court believes the plaintiff herself may have raised and addressed this issue in her February 25, 2010 brief in opposition to the motion for summary judgment, the court will grant the plaintiff's motion for reargument and reconsideration.   The plaintiff is given until September 24, 2010 to file an additional brief on the issue of whether or not a duty is owed by rental car companies to members of the public to investigate a renter's driving record.   The defendant shall have until October 8, 2010 to respond to the plaintiff's brief.   If additional argument on the briefs is necessary, the court shall notify the parties.

Cosgrove, J.

Cosgrove, Emmet L., J.