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. ******************************************************

JOSEPH SORACCO ET AL. v. WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN, INC., ET AL. (AC 31848) (AC 31850)
Bishop, Lavine and Peters, Js. Argued March 14--officially released May 24, 2011

(Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven, Jones, J. [motion to intervene]; Holzberg, J. [allocation of proceeds]; Silbert, J. [motion for joint judgment].) Thomas P. O'Dea, Jr., for the appellant in Docket No. AC 31848, appellee in Docket No. AC 31850 (named defendant). William F. Gallagher, for the appellees in Docket No. AC 31848, appellants in Docket No. AC 31850 (plaintiffs). Ellen M. Aspell, for the appellee in Docket Nos. AC 31848 and 31850 (intervening plaintiff Manafort Brothers, Inc.).

Opinion

LAVINE, J. The plaintiffs, Joseph Soracco (Soracco) and his spouse, Cheryl Soracco, and the defendant Williams Scotsman, Inc.,1 appeal from the decision of the trial court, entered in favor of the intervening plaintiff, Manafort Brothers, Inc. (Manafort), denying their joint motion for judgment to enforce a settlement agreement that they reached to resolve the action brought by the plaintiffs against the defendant. On appeal, the plaintiffs and the defendant claim that (1) the denial of their joint motion for judgment is a final judgment that can be immediately appealed and (2) the court improperly denied their joint motion because the settlement agreement was clear and unambiguous. We conclude that the court's denial of the joint motion for judgment is not a final judgment and, accordingly, dismiss the appeals.2 The following facts, many of which were set forth in an earlier appeal filed in this action in Soracco v. Williams Scotsman, Inc., 292 Conn. 86, 971 A.2d 1 (2009), are necessary for the resolution of the plaintiffs' and the defendant's claims. ``The plaintiffs brought an action against the defendant seeking to recover for injuries that . . . Soracco . . . had sustained on October 16, 2001, as a result of the alleged negligence of the defendant's agents. Soracco sustained his injuries when he fell from a construction trailer after an employee of the defendant allegedly removed the stairs leading from the trailer door to the ground without ensuring that the trailer was unoccupied. Soracco was an employee of Manafort at the time of the accident and was injured in the course of his employment. Manafort became obligated to and did pay Soracco workers' compensation benefits as a result of his injuries. Soracco's claim for damages was brought pursuant to General Statutes

Download Soracco v. Williams Scotsman, Inc..pdf

Connecticut Law