Norma V. Bremmer–Mclain et al. v. City of New London et al. (2011)

ORDER

The parties were ordered to appear on November 21, 2011, concerning a pretrial and subpoena request (# 114).   After hearing from the parties and a review of the pleadings, it is hereby ordered that:

1. The self-represented plaintiffs shall file a revised complaint as a result of the order of Goldberg, J. (# 125.01), overruling the plaintiffs' objection to the defendants' request to revise (# 119) the original complaint (# 100.31).

The plaintiffs shall comply with this order by responding to the specific revisions requested in the request to revise (# 119) as ordered by the court.   The first and second requests require the plaintiffs to separate out causes of actions (e.g. negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract, etc.) in separate counts for each plaintiff.   The third request requires the plaintiffs to specify the individual defendants by name referred to in Count One ¶¶ 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10.   The fourth request requires the plaintiffs to identify the claim (e.g. negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract, etc.) and to which defendant the claim is directed.   Further, if legal ground giving rise to Count One ¶¶ 3 and 4 differ from other legal claims in Count One, please set those claims out in a separate count or counts.   The fifth request requires specification of as to plaintiffs' claim against each individual defendant to be specific with the specific cause of action (e.g. negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract, etc.) set out in separate counts if Count One ¶ 5(a-e) is different from other claims in Count One.

The sixth request requires the plaintiffs to specify which plaintiff or plaintiffs is claiming what cause of action and if different causes are claimed (e.g. negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract, etc.) from the other claims in count Two, then set each out in a separate count.

The seventh request as to Count Two ¶ 2, please state how the individual defendants “wilfully harassed” and “intimidated” either or both plaintiffs and set out separate counts if different than the legal claims set out in Count Two.

The eighth request requires a response comparable to seventh revision above as to the claim of “wilfully direct[ed] actual bigotry.”

The ninth request requires a response comparable to the seventh revision above as to the claim of “wilfully invaded the privacy.”

Any attempt by the plaintiffs to add claims and/or counts not consistent with the requirements of this order shall the plaintiff or plaintiffs to file a request to amend the revised complaint pursuant to the procedure set forth in the Connecticut Practice Book as amended.

It is further ordered that the scheduling order in effect is stayed pending hearing and further order by this court.

Devine, J.

Devine, James J., J.