Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** CARL R. BAUER v. MALCOLM C. POUNDS ET AL. (AC 19136)
Lavery, C. J., and Schaller and Healey, Js. Argued September 18--officially released December 5, 2000 Counsel

John J. LaCava, for the appellant (plaintiff). John A. Blazi, for the appellees (defendant H.N.S. Management Company, Inc., et al.).
Opinion

HEALEY, J. The plaintiff, Carl R. Bauer, cross appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the motion to set aside the jury's verdict filed by the defendant H.N.S. Management Company, Inc. (H.N.S.), doing business as Connecticut Transit, in this personal injury action.1 The plaintiff claims that the court improperly granted the motion because (1) it was based on factual and legal grounds different from those set forth in a previous motion H.N.S. had filed seeking a directed verdict, which was denied after the close of the plaintiff's case-in-chief, (2) it incorporated facts that were not presented at trial, (3) there was sufficient evidence from which the jury reasonably could infer that H.N.S.

owned the bus involved in the motor vehicle accident at issue and (4) at the relevant time, the defendant John Doe was driving the bus in the usual course of the business of H.N.S. and was one of its agents or employees. We reverse in part the judgment of the trial court. The following procedural history is relevant to this appeal. The plaintiff brought an action for negligence seeking to recover damages for personal injuries arising out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred on October 20, 1992, on High Ridge Road in Stamford. The plaintiff named four defendants: Fairfield Home Oil Corporation, Malcolm C. Pounds, H.N.S. and Doe. The plaintiff alleged that a city transit bus and an oil truck were negligently operated, thereby causing the accident and his injuries. The plaintiff alleged that the oil truck was owned by Fairfield Home Oil Corporation and operated by Pounds. The plaintiff alleged that the bus was ``owned and/or operated by the defendant Connecticut Transit and driven by an unknown driver, John Doe,2 one of its agents and employees. . . .'' The case was tried to a jury. At the close of the plaintiff's case-in-chief, H.N.S. made a motion for a directed verdict ``because there [was] no evidence to support the allegation that the bus was in fact owned by Connecticut Transit.'' The court denied the motion. The jury returned a plaintiff's verdict in the amount of $100,300 against all of the defendants. The jury found that the plaintiff's comparative negligence was not greater than that of the defendants, and the jury apportioned the negligence as follows: 15 percent as against `` `John Doe' H.N.S. Management,'' 47 percent as against ``Malcolm C. Pounds Fairfield Home Oil'' and 38 percent as against the plaintiff.3 Thereafter, H.N.S. filed a motion to set aside the verdict4 on the ground that ``there was no proof offered at the trial that the defendant, H.N.S. Management, Inc., owned the bus that was allegedly involved in the accident involving the plaintiff.'' The court granted the motion, ruling that ``[i]t was incumbent upon the plaintiff to establish by some credible evidence that the bus which allegedly contributed to the cause of the accident was in fact owned by the defendant H.N.S. Management. There was no evidence by which the jury could make that inference. Without such evidence, the plaintiff could not prove that the `John Doe' operator was an agent of the defendant under the provisions of [General Statutes]

Download Bauer v. Pounds.pdf

Connecticut Law