William Chenevert v. Merril Turek (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

I

Procedural History

The plaintiff, William Chenevert, commenced this civil action against the defendant, Merril Turek.   The operative complaint is an August 30, 2012 pleading.   The complaint alleges that on May 23, 2012, the plaintiff was the owner of a 2005 BMW 325 CI convertible, which was struck from behind by a motor vehicle operated by the defendant.   It is alleged that the collision occurred as a consequence of the defendant's negligent operation of his motor vehicle.   The plaintiff contends that he has suffered a diminution in value to his motor vehicle in the amount of $4,283.00.   In response, the defendant filed his answer dated December 4, 2012.

The case was tried to the court on September 5, 2013.   During the trial, the parties presented the testimony of both expert and lay witnesses and introduced into evidence a number of exhibits.   Thereafter, the parties filed with the court post-trial briefs.¹

II

DiscussionA. Applicable Law

In Connecticut, “[o]ur rule is that when the injury is less than a complete loss ․ the measure of damages is the difference in value between the property before and after the loss, with interest from the date of loss.   And when the property injured may be repaired, if repairs will substantially restore the property to its former condition, the cost of such repairs will ordinarily furnish proper proof of the loss.”  (Internal quotation marks omitted.)   Littlejohn v. Elionsky, 130 Conn. 541, 543, 36 A.2d 52 (1944), quoting Hawkins v. Garford Trucking Co., Inc., 96 Conn. 337, 341, 114 A.94 (1921);  See also Damico v. Dalton, 1 Conn.App. 186, 198, 469 A.2d 795 (1984).

B. Facts

From the credible evidence presented at trial the court finds the following relevant facts.   The plaintiff is the owner of a 2005 BMW 325 CI convertible.   Plaintiff's Exhibit 2. On May 23, 2012, in Southwick, Massachusetts, this motor vehicle was struck in the rear by a 1997 Chevrolet operated by the defendant.   Plaintiff's Exhibit 1. The defendant concedes that his negligent operation proximately caused the accident.   The BMW sustained extensive damage.   Plaintiff's Exhibit 3. This damage included structural damage.  Id. The motor vehicle was repaired by Airport Road Auto Body of Hartford, Connecticut.  Id. The cost of repairs totaled $8,144.26.   There is no balance due in this amount to the automobile body shop.   The repairs were performed in a workmanlike manner.

The plaintiff retained the services of his expert witness, Robert Collins, Jr., to determine whether the BMW suffered a diminished value from the accident.   Collins offered his opinion that the fair market value of the BMW after the repairs had been completed was diminished to the extent of $4,283.

The defendant hired James Murphy as his expert witness.   Murphy opined that the diminished value to the motor vehicle was $1,000.

Based on the totality of credible evidence presented, the court finds that the diminished value of the 2005 BMW 325 CI proximately caused by the May 23, 2012 accident is $4,283.²

III

Conclusion

Judgment shall enter in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $4,283, plus taxable costs.

SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

PETER EMMETT WIESE, JUDGE

FOOTNOTES

FN1. At the time of trial, the defendant conceded liability for the accident.   The issue being contested is the value of property damage to the motor vehicle..  FN1. At the time of trial, the defendant conceded liability for the accident.   The issue being contested is the value of property damage to the motor vehicle.

FN2. The pre-collision fair market value was $16,475 and the post-collision fair market value of the vehicle after repairs was $12,192..  FN2. The pre-collision fair market value was $16,475 and the post-collision fair market value of the vehicle after repairs was $12,192.

Wiese, Peter E., J.