Laurie Lidz v. Riverview Commons Association, Inc. et al. (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (# 108)

On January 23, 2009, the plaintiff, Laurie Lidz, filed a five-count complaint against the defendants, Riverview Commons Association, Integra Management Services LLC and Gerard F. Petit.   The plaintiff's complaint stems from alleged flood damage to her condominium, which was part of Riverview Commons Condominium.   In count one, the plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that Riverview Commons Association, Inc. (Riverview Commons) received an insurance settlement on behalf of the plaintiff, but that it has refused to pay the plaintiff the full amount owed to her.   In count two, the plaintiff alleges that Riverview Commons intentionally and wrongfully converted the insurance proceeds due to her, and in count five, the plaintiff alleges that Riverview Commons failed to comply with its own declarations under General Statutes § 47-2778.¹

On July 12, 2010, Riverview Commons filed a motion for summary judgment as to counts one, two and five of the plaintiff's complaint.   In its motion, Riverview Commons alleges that since the plaintiff has failed to respond to its requests for admissions, the material allegations in those requests are deemed admitted by the plaintiff.   Riverview Commons alleges that applicable case law supports this proposition.   As a result, Riverview Commons alleges that there are no questions of material fact, and the court should grant the motion for summary judgment as to counts one, two and five.

After reviewing the file, the court finds that the plaintiff has failed to comply with Riverview Commons' request to revise filed on February 4, 2010, and its requests for admissions filed on April 12, 2010.   In fact, the last action taken by the plaintiff was a motion for permission to withdraw brought by her attorney on November 6, 2009, which the court granted on December 14, 2009.   The plaintiff has not filed an objection to the present motion for summary judgment, nor did the plaintiff appear at the short calendar when this case was heard on September 13, 2010.

Practice Book § 13-23(a) provides in relevant part:  “Each matter of which an admission is requested is admitted unless, within thirty days after the filing of the notice required by Section 13-22(b), or within such shorter or longer time as the judicial authority may allow, the party to whom the request is directed files and serves upon the party requesting the admission a written answer or objection addressed to the matter, signed by the party or by his attorney.”   See also Gagne v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, 26 Conn.App. 74, 77, 597 A.2d 836, cert. denied, 220 Conn. 932, 599 A.2d 382 (1991).   Moreover, “[t]he granting of summary judgment can be based on admissions resulting from a party's failure to respond to requests for admissions.  Orenstein v. Old Buckingham Corporation, 205 Conn. 572, 575-77, 534 A.2d 1172 (1987).”  Gagne v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, supra, 26 Conn.App. 77.

In the present matter, Riverview Commons sought admissions from the plaintiff that:  “4. Riverview Commons Association, Inc. has not wrongfully detained or exercised dominion over any of her personal property or money, including any insurance proceeds, to which she was entitled to immediate possession. 5. The plaintiff has refused to accept monies from Riverview Commons Association, Inc. in connection with the damage that occurred to her condominium unit on January 25, 2008. 6. Riverview Commons Association, Inc. has not intentionally and wrongfully converted any of the insurance proceeds alleged in the plaintiff's complaint. 9. Riverview Commons Association, Inc. and its agents have timely paid the plaintiff any insurance proceeds due to her. 11.   Riverview Commons Association has fully complied with its own declaration and bylaws relative to its dealings with the plaintiff.”

Since the plaintiff has failed to comply with Practice Book § 13-23, the foregoing requests for admissions are deemed admitted by the plaintiff.   As a result, there are no issues of material fact, and Riverview Commons' motion for summary judgment as to counts one, two and five of the complaint is granted.

So ordered.

BY THE COURT,

Roche, J.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. The General Statutes do not include § 47-2778..  FN1. The General Statutes do not include § 47-2778.

Roche, Vincent E., J.