DocketNumber: No. 123437
Citation Numbers: 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 15740
Judges: MARTIN, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 12/9/2002
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
On August 23, 2002, the defendant filed the present motion for summary judgment on the ground that the complaint is barred by the statute of limitations set forth in General Statutes §
"[S]ummary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, affidavits and any other proof submitted show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. . . . In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the trial court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. . . . The party seeking summary judgment has the burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue [of] material facts which, under applicable principles of substantive law, entitle him to a judgment as a matter of law . . ., and the party opposing such a motion must provide an evidentiary foundation to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material fact." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gaynor v. Payne, CT Page 15741
General Statutes §
There is no dispute that the plaintiff brought this action within three years of sustaining the injury. There is also no dispute that the defendant sold the backhoe to Tanner Ford in 1988 where the defendant no longer retained possession or control. The plaintiff fails to meet his burden of submitting contrary evidence tending to show that the statute of limitations has not run. "The existence of the genuine issue of material fact must be demonstrated by counter-affidavits and concrete evidence." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Pion v. Southern NewEngland Telephone Co.,
For the forgoing reasons, the evidence submitted by the parties shows that there is no genuine issue of material fact, therefore, the defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted.
___________________ Martin, J.
CT Page 15742