DocketNumber: No. CV910098300
Citation Numbers: 1992 Conn. Super. Ct. 4741
Judges: PURTILL, J.
Filed Date: 5/27/1992
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
There does not appear to be any material question of CT Page 4742 fact here. The question of law presented by the motion is whether or not the action is barred by, the Recreational Use Statute, General Statute Section
The exact same issue was raised in this case by a motion to strike (101). The issue was decided by the court (Axelrod, J.) on July 2, 1991 and is the law of the case. Although the law of the case is not written in cement, where the identical issue has previously been ruled upon, the court in a subsequent proceeding on the same issue, should proceed with caution before overruling another judge.
Here it would be prudent to treat the previous ruling as the law of the case and a final decision the issue.
Accordingly the motion for summary judgment is denied.
PURTILL, J.