Millicent Corbett v. Department of Developmental Services (2012)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION TO DISMISS

The self-represented plaintiff, Millicent Corbett, commenced this action against the defendant, the Department of Developmental Services, seeking payment in the amount of $4,949 for damages caused to her home.   She alleges that the damages were caused by one of the defendant's clients while she provided care for him.   The defendant filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's claim for monetary relief is barred by sovereign immunity.   Specifically, the defendant argues that no statute authorizes a direct action of this kind, and the plaintiff did not pursue her claim before the claims commissioner or seek his authorization for this action.   The plaintiff filed a letter in opposition to the defendant's motion.   The plaintiff does not dispute that she did not proceed before the claims commissioner.   She argues that the defendant has paid such claims in the past, but has refused to pay this claim.   The court heard the parties' arguments at the short calendar on March 19, 2012, and allowed the plaintiff to file additional documents in support of her position, which she did.

Absent a statutory waiver of sovereign immunity, “[w]hen a plaintiff brings an action for money damages against the state, [she] must proceed through the office of the claims commissioner pursuant to chapter 53 of the General Statutes, §§ 4–141 through 4–165.   Otherwise, the action must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.”  Prigge v. Ragaglia, 265 Conn. 338, 349 (2003).   The claims commissioner, pursuant to § 4–158(a), “may (1) order that a claim be denied or dismissed, (2) order immediate payment of a just claim in an amount not exceeding seven thousand five hundred dollars ․ or (4) authorize a claimant to sue the state, as provided in section 4–160.”

Here, there is no applicable statute waiving the state's immunity.   The plaintiff seeks payment for damages from the state, but she failed to follow the prescribed procedure and she does not have authorization from the claims commissioner to bring this suit.   Accordingly, the court has no jurisdiction to consider the merits of her claim.   The motion to dismiss is granted.

HILLER, J.

Hiller, Arthur A., J.