Jamie G. v. Dept. of Children & Families
Citations
- 352 Conn. 736
Syllabus
Pursuant to statute (§ 4-160 (a)), ''the Claims Commissioner . . . may autho- rize suit against the state on any claim which . . . presents an issue of law or fact under which the state, were it a private person, could be liable,'' and ''[t]he state may file an opposition . . . based solely on jurisdictional grounds . . . or . . . judicial, quasi-judicial or legislative immunity.'' Pursuant further to statute (§ 4-160 (h)), ''[i]n each action authorized by the Claims Commissioner . . . the state waives its immunity from liability and from suit . . . and waives all defenses which might arise from the eleemosy- nary or governmental nature of the activity complained of, and . . . the rights and liability of the state . . . shall be coextensive with and shall equal the rights and liability of private persons in like circumstances.'' The plaintiff sought to recover damages from the defendant, the Department of Children and Families (DCF), for, inter alia, the death of T, the plaintiff's four year old daughter, who wandered unattended and drowned in a pond. Prior to the drowning incident, the Probate Court had removed the plaintiff and T's biological mother as guardians and vested temporary custody of T in T's maternal relatives, A and L. To assist it in determining whether to 6 There is no claim before us that the case should be remanded to the trial court for a new hearing in damages because the trial court might have awarded a lesser amount of punitive damages had it known that the plaintiff was entitled to treble damages under § 52-571h (b). See, e.g., State v. Saucier, 283 Conn. 207, 223, 926 A.2d 633 (2007) (''[a]n unmentioned claim is, by definition, inadequately briefed, and one that is generally . . . considered abandoned'' (internal quotation marks omitted)). Likewise, this opinion does not address any other claims that could have been made by the defendants but were not made because of their failure to appear. In accordance with our policy of protecting the pri
Judges: Mullins; McDonald; Ecker; Alexander; Dannehy
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.