Lori Ortiz v. National Amusements, Inc. (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

On June 14, 2011, the defendant, National Amusements, Inc., filed the present motion for reargument of its motion for summary judgment.   On May 26, 2011, this court denied the motion for summary judgment on the ground that the defendant failed to submit evidence demonstrating that the alleged defect did not exist for a length of time such that the defendant should have discovered it.   Put differently, the court held that the defendant failed to meet its burden on a motion for summary judgment.

The defendant now argues that “the court mistakenly applied a burden of proof for the defendant that according to fundamental premises liability law is incorrect and would be impossible for any defendant to satisfy.”   The defendant continues, “[t]he court has mistakenly confused the relative burdens of the parties.”

The burden of a movant on a motion for summary judgment is well settled.  “As the burden of proof is on the movant, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the opponent ․ When documents submitted in support of a motion for summary judgment fail to establish that there is no genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party has no obligation to submit documents establishing the existence of such an issue ․” (Emphasis added;  internal quotation marks omitted.)  Mitchell v. Redvers, 130 Conn.App. 100, 107, 22 A.2d 659 (2011).   See also Maltas v. Maltas, 298 Conn. 354, 366, 2 A.3d 902 (2010);  Ramirez v. Health Net of the Northeast, Inc., 285 Conn. 1, 10–11, 938 A.2d 576 (2008);  Mara v. Otto, 127 Conn.App. 404, 408, 13 A.3d 1134 (2011);  Jansma v. Patrons Mutual Ins. Co. of Connecticut, Inc., 126 Conn.App. 855, 858, 15 A.3d 163 (2011);  Riley v. Pierson, 126 Conn.App. 486, 491–92, 12 A.3d 581 (2011).

To be entitled to summary judgment based on the absence of constructive notice, the defendant must submit evidence demonstrating that the alleged condition had not existed for such a length of time that the defendant should, in the exercise of due care, have discovered it.   See, e.g., Williams v. Autotote Enterprises, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven, Docket No. CV 08–5024151 (December 6, 2010, Woods, J.) [51 Conn. L. Rptr. 90].   See also Walker v. Central Connecticut Coast Young Men's Christian Assn., Superior Court, judicial district of Fairfield, Docket No. CV 07–5006163 (May 28, 2008, Frankel, J.);   Leonard v. G & W Management, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of Waterbury, Docket No. CV 05–5000179 (April 7, 2008, Upson, J.).   As discussed in the decision of this court denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment, the defendant failed to submit any such evidence.   The defendant's motion for reargument is therefore denied.

Woods, J.

Woods, Glenn A., J.