DocketNumber: No. CV 91-0445070S
Citation Numbers: 1992 Conn. Super. Ct. 997
Judges: GILL, JUDGE. CT Page 998
Filed Date: 1/13/1992
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Our law provides that once liability has been established and damages awarded to the plaintiff, that the amount of such an award may be reduced to reflect relevant payment to the plaintiff from certain collateral sources. Section
Generally, information is subject to pre-trial discovery if it "would be of assistance in the prosecution or defense of the action" and "appears reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." P.B. Sec. 218.
The post trial proceedings required by Section
Recently the Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut had occasion to review the collateral source rule as it pertains to the admissibility of evidence of such at trial. Gurliacci v. Mayer,
The question for this court is whether the "malingering" exception to the collateral source rule caused by Gurliacci has any effect on the pretrial discovery in the instant case. The court concludes that it has no effect whatsoever.
Gurliacci involved a police officer who remained out of work for five years and who, by contract, received an actual increase in earnings during that period because her salary was tax free income. There was significant corroborative evidence of malingering.
The instant case involves a high school student injured at school. It is highly speculative at best, and premature at worst, for this court to find that it has the discretion in a pre-trial setting to find a "malingering" exception to the rule.
Accordingly, collateral source payments need not be CT Page 999 disclosed in this pre-trial discovery.
BY THE COURT, CHARLES D. GILL JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT