Cardoza v. Waterbury

Citations

• 224 Conn. App. 813

Syllabus

The plaintiff motorist sought to recover damages from the defendant city for personal injuries she sustained and for damage to her vehicle allegedly resulting from a defective condition in a roadway that was owned and maintained by the defendant city. Pursuant to the applicable statute (§ 13a-149), the plaintiff sent a notice of claim to the defendant that stated the date, time and location of the incident, described her injuries and the losses she incurred, and provided that the cause of such injuries and losses was a ''defect in the roadway . . . .'' The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint, arguing that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to comply with the notice requirements of § 13a-149, as her notice did not identify the alleged defect in the road that caused her injuries and damages. The trial court granted the motion, concluding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action, and rendered judgment dismissing the complaint. On the plaintiff's appeal to this court, held that the trial court properly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction: the language of the plaintiff's notice did not provide the level of specificity necessary to meet the requirements of § 13a-149 because it failed to describe the cause of the injury in any way beyond the assertion that there was a ''defect in the roadway,'' and, contrary to the plaintiff's argument, the use of the word ''defect'' did not provide any information as to the cause of the plaintiff's injuries nor did the fact that the notice provided that the defect was ''in'' the road rule out a long list of potential defects; moreover, the plaintiff's argument that the notice was sufficient in light of the complaints she had filed with the city's police department and public works department following the incident, which provided additional information, was unavailing because § 13a-149 provides that the no