Warren Null v. Adele Jacob (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This is a legal malpractice claim that has had several revised complaints sounding in both tort and contract.   The defendant has filed this motion for summary judgment based on the theory that the breach of contract count is in effect legally insufficient because of lack of term or time certain.

The defendant claims that the lack of a specific date as to when the alleged contract was formed or would conclude, in effect, leaves this contract without an essential term.   The specific time within which the defendant attorney would settle the underlying case for a sum certain is the focus of the defendant's claim.

Settlement of a personal injury claim is not something that lends itself to an exact time frame.   In fact, such matters seldom confine themselves to a strict time frame.   The settlement process and ultimate disbursement of funds to the purported plaintiff is very much open-ended.   There was no assertion that time was of the essence.  Green Folly Associates, LLC v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 138 Conn.App. 481, 487 (2012);  Brzezinek v. Covenant Ins. Co., 74 Conn.App. 1, 7 (2002);  Schlicher v. Schwartz, 58 Conn.App. 80, 86 (2000).   Whether the plaintiff has a valid breach of contract claim will turn very much upon the evidence at trial and cannot be decided at this stage of the pleadings.   The lack of specificity of a time frame does not automatically defeat a breach of contract claim, but may raise questions at time of trial as to the enforceability of any such alleged contractual claim.

Such a material issue of fact and law militates against a summary judgment at this stage and therefore defendant's motion is denied.

BY THE COURT

V. ROCHE, J.

Roche, Vincent E., J.