DocketNumber: File 279359
Citation Numbers: 477 A.2d 171, 39 Conn. Super. Ct. 269, 39 Conn. Supp. 269, 1984 Conn. Super. LEXIS 147
Judges: Hammer
Filed Date: 2/28/1984
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/3/2024
The plaintiff, American Airlines, Inc. (American), has brought this products liability action pursuant to §
American claims in its complaint that during an operating test of the jet engine a fire occurred which caused extensive damage to the engine and to the plaintiff's maintenance facilities. The complaint alleges that the fire occurred as a result of the defective fuel nozzle nut. The relief sought by American includes punitive damages under §
The defendant, United Technologies Corporation (UTC), has moved to strike that portion of the plaintiff's claim for relief which seeks punitive damages. UTC argues that the plaintiff may not seek or recover punitive damages because the statute permits such damages "only in cases where personal injuries have been sustained."
A motion to strike tests the legal sufficiency of a pleading. Alarm Applications Co. v. Simsbury VolunteerFire Co.,
Under §
The issue raised by UTC's motion, however, cannot be determined without reference to §
Statutes are construed as a whole and so as to reconcile all parts as far as possible. Connecticut TheaterFoundation, Inc. v. Brown,
The definitions contained in §
It may be noted that this interpretation of the applicable statutory provisions governing product liability actions conforms to this state's common law standards governing the allowance of punitive damages in certain types of tort cases. In Collens v. New CanaanWater Co.,
In a jurisdiction where punitive damages are allowable as an appropriate form of relief, the test of whether they will be awarded in a particular case should not be *Page 273
made to depend on the nature of the injury or the type of damage sustained, but on the nature and consequences of the wrongful conduct involved. See CommercialUnion Ins. Co. v. Upjohn Co.,
For the foregoing reasons the motion of the defendant, United Technologies Corporation, to strike the plaintiff's claim for punitive damages is denied.
City of Danbury v. Corbett , 139 Conn. 379 ( 1953 )
Verdon v. Transamerica Insurance , 187 Conn. 363 ( 1982 )
Alarm Applications Co. v. Simsbury Volunteer Fire Co. , 179 Conn. 541 ( 1980 )
Collens v. New Canaan Water Co. , 155 Conn. 477 ( 1967 )
Savings Bank of Rockville v. Wilcox , 117 Conn. 188 ( 1933 )
Connecticut Theater Foundation, Inc. v. Brown , 179 Conn. 672 ( 1980 )
Carothers v. Getty Petroleum Corporation, No. 383594 (May ... , 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 714 ( 1992 )
Sacred Heart Church v. F.F. Hitchcock Co., No. 123104 (May ... , 14 Conn. L. Rptr. 297 ( 1995 )
Greene v. Black Decker U.S. Inc., No. Cv95-75137 (Mar. 11, ... , 21 Conn. L. Rptr. 431 ( 1998 )
Hartt v. Schwartz, No. 33 19 12 (Mar. 25, 1993) , 1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 2880 ( 1993 )
R.I. Pools, Inc. v. Paramount Concrete, Inc. , 149 Conn. App. 839 ( 2014 )