`
`I
`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`MARILYN DELINE, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
`ESTATE OF DENISE AUGERI
`:
`
`JD. OF MIDDLETOWN
`
`VS.
`
`GREYSTONE REST. HOME, INC. D/B/A
`GREYSTONE RETIREMENT HOME;
`CRYSTAL PLAYER; LUEL IRENE SWANSON;
`LUCILLE IRENE SWANSON; AND
`ASHTIN ZEOLI
`
`:
`
`:
`
`AT IVIIDDLETOWN
`
`JULY 28, 2016
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
`
`Pursuant to Practice Book § 17-44 et seq., the defendants, Greystone Rest
`
`Home,
`
`Inc. d/bla Greystone Retirement Home (hereinafter "Greystone”), Crystal
`
`Player, Luel Irene Swanson, Lucille Irene Swanson, and Ashtin Zecli, respectfully
`
`move this Court for the entry of summary judgment in their favor with respect to the
`
`plaintiff’s, Marilyn Deline’s, Administrator of the Estate of Denise Augeri, Second
`
`Amended Complaint dated January 27, 2016. The plaintiff alleges,
`
`in part,
`
`that
`
`Greystone, Luel Swanson, and Cristal Player were negligent in that they failed to
`
`assess adequately the level of risk the decedent, Denise Augeri, was in; failed to
`
`take reasonable steps to protect her life; and faiied to recognize the severity of the
`
`decedent’s suicidal
`
`ideations. The plaintiff further alleges that Greystone, Lucille
`
`Swanson, RN, and Ashtin Zeoli, RN, deviated below the applicable standard of care
`
`
`
`of a registered nurse andlor below the standard of care of a facility providing nursing
`
`care.
`
`The defendants move for summary judgment on the basis that Greystone, as
`
`a residentiai care home, had no duty to provide nursing care under Conn. Gen. Stat.
`
`§ 19a—490 and § ‘l9—13—D6 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.
`
`Further, Greystone is not licensed by the State as a “health care provider" under
`
`Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52—184b. As more particularly set
`
`forth in the attached
`
`Memorandum of Law, Greystone fostered personal independence in a home-like
`
`environment and residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased. The basic
`
`services provided by Greystone did not create a duty to evaluate residents in order
`
`to determine whether they were a suicide risk. Therefore, the defendants are entitied
`
`to summary judgment as a matter of law.
`
`DEFENDANTS
`
`GREYSTONE REST HOME, INC.
`DIB/All GREYSTONE RETIREMENT
`_ HOME; CRYSTAL PLAYER; LUEL lRENE
`SWANSON; LUCILLE IRENE SWANSON;
`AND ASHTIN ZEOLI
`
`Isl 407831
`By:
`James F. Sullivan, Esq.
`Howard Kohn Sprague & Fitzgerald
`237 Buckingham Street
`
`
`
`Hartford, CT 06106
`Juris No.: 028160
`
`Telephone: 860-525-3101
`Fax: 860-247-4201
`
`CERTEFECATIQN
`
`l hereby certify that this pleading complies with the requirements of Practice
`Book § 4-? and a copy of the foregoing was mailed, U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, or
`electronically delivered pursuant to Practice Book § 10-13 to all counsel and pro se
`parties of record who have given written consent for electronic detivery, as follows
`on this 28th day of July, 2016.
`
`Jose M. Rojas, Esq.
`Rojas Law Firm
`40 Russ Street
`
`Hartford, CT 06106
`
`Paul Levin, Esq.
`Law Offices of Paul Levin
`40 Russ Street
`
`Hartford, CT 06106
`
`Nicole A. Demers, Esq.
`AG-Civil Rights/Torts
`55 Elm Street, PO. Box 120
`Hartford, CT 06141
`
`407831
`Isl
`By:
`James F. Sullivan
`
`Commissioner of Superior Court
`
`
`
`DOCKET NO. MMX-CV-15—6014578-S
`
`: SUPERIOR COURT
`
`MARELYN DELINE, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE :
`ESTATE OF DENISE AUGERI
`
`J. D. OF MIDDLETOWN
`
`VS.
`
`GREYSTONE REST HOME, INC. DIBIAI
`GREYSTONE RETIREMENT HOME;
`CRYSTAL
`PLAYER; LUEL IRENE SWANSON; LUCILLE
`IRENE SWANSON; AND ASHTEN ZEOLI
`
`: AT MIDDLETOWN
`
`:
`
`July 28, 2016
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MEMORANDUM OF LAW
`IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
`
`Pursuant to Practice Book § 17-44 et seq., the defendants, Greystone Rest
`
`Home,
`
`inc. d/bla Greystone Retirement Home (hereinafter “Greystone”), Crystal
`
`Player, Luel Irene Swanson, Lucille Irene Swanson, and Ashtin Zeoli, respectfully
`
`move this Court for the entry of summary judgment in their favor with respect to the
`
`plaintiff’s, Marilyn Deline, Administrator of the Estate of Denise Augeri, Second
`
`Amended Complaint dated January 27, 2016. The plaintiffs Complaint asserts
`
`claims of negligence and medical malpractice. The defendants move for summary
`
`judgment on the basis that Greystone, as a residential care home, had no duty to
`
`
`
`provide nursing care under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a—490 and § 19-13-D6 of the
`
`Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies. Further, Greystone is not licensed by
`
`the State as a “health care provider" under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-f84b. Greystone
`
`fostered personal independence in a home—like environment and residents were
`
`allowed to come and go as they pleased. The basic services provided by Greystone
`
`did not create a duty to evaluate residents in order to determine whether they were a
`
`suicide risk. Therefore, the defendants are entitled to summary judgment as a matter
`
`of law.
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND:
`
`Greystone is licensed by the State of Connecticut as a residential care home
`
`located in Portland, Connecticut. Lucille l. Swanson Affidavit at 11 6. (“L. Swanson
`
`Aft. at 11 Ni") (attached as Exhibit "A”). Greystone offers housing and care for
`
`residents who require more than congregate housing, but who, by no means, have a
`
`current need for nursing/convalescent home care. |_d_. at 11 7. The facility sometimes
`
`takes in residents who have severe physical, emotional, psychological, andlor
`
`psychiatric disorders. Q at 1[ 8. Even so, Greystone is not a medical facility. lg_. at 1]
`
`9. The facility‘s regulations foster personal independence on the part of the residents
`
`in a home-like environment. 1; at
`
`11 10. To that end, Greystone provides food,
`
`
`
`shelter,
`
`laundry and other services, such as recreational services, which do not
`
`require the training or skills of a licensed nurse. lg, at 11 11. Greystone voluntarily
`
`employed a registered nurse so that Greystone and family members of the residents
`
`would have peace of mind. Ld, at 11 12. The nurse worked only part—time from 8:00
`
`a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and provided only basic care, which inciuded checking weight,
`
`blood sugars, temperature, and blood pressure. lcl_. at 11 13. These basic services
`
`could be refused by residents. 1; at 11 14. Additional services provided included
`
`assistance with bathing and help with dressing. list; at 1115.
`
`On or about January 2012, Greystone had a resident commit suicide by
`
`entering a nearby river. L. Swanson Aff. at 11 16. Because of this previous incident,
`
`Greystone scrupulously screened potential residents during the application process
`
`by inquiring about past attempts of suicide and suicidal ideations. Q at 1117. Before
`
`becoming a resident, the decedent, Denise Augeri, unden/vent an initial
`
`interview
`
`and a pre—residency screening process. Q at 11 18. During the initial interview, the
`
`decedent’s mental health care worker and apportionment defendant, Mary Carter,
`
`failed to disclose to Greystone that the decedent had suicidal ideations even though
`
`Ms. Carter knew that the decedent had attempted on two previous occasions to
`
`jump off the Arrigoni Bridge in It/liddletown, Connecticut. L. Swanson Aff. at 11 19.
`
`If
`
`
`
`the decedent or Ms. Carter had mentioned anything regarding suicide attempts or
`
`suicidal ideations, Greystone would not have allowed Ms. Augeri to five in the home.
`
`ILL at 1'1’ 20.
`
`On September 10, 2013, Ms. Augeri, became a resident at Greystone.
`
`;l,_._
`
`Swanson Aff. at {I 21. During her stay, the decedent commented that she really liked
`
`Greystone and was happy at the home. ld_. at 1} 22. On December 10, 2013, Ashtin
`
`Zeoli, RN, received a telephone call from a doctor’s office and was told that the
`
`decedent was upset because her ride to the doctor’s office was cancelled due to the
`
`weather. Ashtin Zeoli Affidavit at ‘H 6 ("A. Zeoli Aff. at 1]
`
`") (attached as Exhibit
`
`"B”). Ms. Augeri also commented that she was “done and wanted to die and jump off
`
`the bridge.” l__c1._ at ‘H 7. Ms. Zeoli notified Middlesex Hospital, who, in turn, referred
`
`Ms. Augeri to is Mobile Crisis Unit. Lt; at ‘H 8. Mobile Crisis then spoke with the Ms.
`
`Augeri and subsequently told Ms. Zeoli that Ms. Augeri was not a threat to herself.
`
`l_cL at Ti 9. Ms. Augeri was also given a mobile crisis telephone number to call. Id_. at 1[
`
`10. The decedent was cleared by Middlesex Hospital and its Mobile Crisis Unit to
`
`live and remain at Greystone with its requisite level of care. L. Swanson Aff. at 1123.
`
`Further, Greystone was assured that the decedent was not a suicide risk and that
`
`the facility would not have to adopt any additional procedures to prevent a suicide.
`
`
`
`Q at Ti 24.
`
`Greystone maintained sign-in and sign—out sheets. The facility, however, as a
`
`residential care home, could not and did not restrict residents from leaving. ;
`
`Swanson Afi. at 11 25. On February 19, 2014, the decedent signed out of Greystone
`
`in good spirits at approximately 8:15 a.m. in order to go to a doctor’s appointment in
`
`New Haven. Q at 1126. The decedent left in a taxi cab. id at ‘H27. She had the taxi
`
`however drop her off at a Dunkin Donuts in Portland. lg. Ms. Augeri then walked to
`
`the Middletown side of the Arrigoni Bridge and jumped off.
`
`ld_. at ‘ii 28. After Ms.
`
`Augeri’s death, the Connecticut Department of Public Health and the Middletown
`
`Police Department conducted a thorough investigation and cleared Greystone of any
`
`responsibility for her death. lcl_. at 1|’ 29.
`
`In Count One of the plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint,
`
`the plaintiff
`
`alleges, in part, that Greystone, Luel Swanson, and Cristal Player were negligent in
`
`that they failed to assess adequately the level of risk the decedent, Denise Augeri,
`
`was in; failed to take reasonable steps to protect her life; and failed to recognize the
`
`severity of the decedent’s suicidal ideations.
`
`In Count ?|'wo, the plaintiff alieges,
`
`in
`
`part, that Greystone, Lucille Swanson, RN, and Ashtin Zeoli, RN, deviated below the
`
`applicabie standard of care of a registered nurse andlor below the standard of care
`
`
`
`of a faciiity providing nursing care.
`
`The defendants maintain that Greystone, as a residential care home, had no
`
`duty to provide nursing care under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a—490 and § 19-13-D6 of
`
`the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies. Further, Greystone is not licensed
`
`by the State as a “health care provider" under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-184-b. The
`
`basic services provided by Greystone did not create a duty to evaluate residents in
`
`order to determine whether they were a suicide risk.
`
`sir.
`
`- AFtGUiViENT:-
`
`A.
`
`Standard for Summary Judgment:
`
`Summary 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." Practice
`
`Book§ 17-49. “In deciding a motion for summaryjudgment, the trial court must view
`
`the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party." DiPietro v.
`
`Farmington Sports Arena, LLC., 306 Conn. 107, 116, 49 A.3d 951 (2012). “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." 1;;
`
`“A material fact .
`
`.
`
`. [is] a fact whic_h will make a difference in the result of the
`
`case.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`. A party may not rely on mere speculation or conjecture as to the true
`
`nature of the facts to overcome a motion for summary judgment." Swanson v.
`
`Groton, 116 Conn. App. 849, 853, 977 A.2d 738 (2009). “When a motion for
`
`summary judgment is supported by affidavits and other documents, an adverse
`
`party, by affidavit or as otherwise provided by [Practice Book § 17-45] must set forth
`
`specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial, and if he does not so
`
`respond, the court is entitled to rely upon the facts stated in the affidavit of the
`
`movant.” Bartha v. Waterbugj House Wrecking Co., 190 Conn. 8, 11-12, 459 A.2d
`
`115 (1983). It is not enough for the opposing party merely to assert the existence of
`
`such a disputed issue. “Mere assertions of fact, whether contained in a complaint or
`
`in a brief, are insufficient to estabiish the existence of a material fact and, therefore,
`
`cannot refute evidence properly presented to the court under Practice Book § [17-
`
`45]." Bartha, 190 Conn. at 12. See also lnwood Condo. Ass'n v. Winer, 49 Conn.
`
`App. 694, 697, 716 A.2d 139 (1998). To successfuliy oppose a motion for summary
`
`judgment, “the nonmovant must recite specific facts in accordance with Practice
`
`10
`
`
`
`Book (1998 Rev.) §§ 17-45 and 17-46... which contradict those stated in the
`
`movant’s affidavits and documents and show that there is a genuine issue for trial. if
`
`he does not so respond, summary judgment shall be entered against him." l_r_i__wg;d
`
`Condo. Ass’n, 49 Conn. App. at 697.
`
`A genuine issue is one that is supported by evidentiary facts or substantial
`
`evidence apart from the pleadings, “from which the material facts alleged in the
`
`pleadings can warrantably be inferred.” Buell Indus. v. Greater N.Y. Mut. lns. Co.
`
`259 Conn. 527, 556, 791 A.2d 489 (2002). The evidence is considered substantial
`
`when it is sufficient to "remove the issue from the field of surmise and conjecture.”
`
`Chasse v. Albert, 14? Conn. 680, 683, 166 A.2d 148 (1960). “indeed, the whole
`
`summary judgment procedure would be defeated if, without any showing of
`
`evidence, a case could be forced to trial by a mere assertion that an issue exists."
`
`Farrell v. Farrell, 182 Conn. 34, 39, 438 A.2d 415 (1980). See also 12 Havemeyer
`
`Place Co. LLC v. Gordon, 93 Conn. App. 140, 158, 888 A.2d 141 (2006).
`
`B.
`
`The Defendants Are Entitled To Judgment As A Matter Of Law
`Because, As A Residential Care Home, They Had No Duty To
`Provide Nursing Care Or To Evaluate Residents In Order To
`Determine if They Were Suicide Risks
`
`In order for a plaintiff to establish a negligence claim, she must show that the
`
`defendant owed a duty of care to her, that the defendant breached that duty, and
`
`I1
`
`
`
`that there exists a causal connection between the breach and the resulting harm to
`
`the plaintiff. R.K. Contractors, Inc. v. Fusco Corp., 231 Conn. 381, 384, 650 A.2d
`
`153 (1994). The existence of a duty is a question of law which can be determined by
`
`the Court, and only if the duty is found to exist does the trier of fact move onto
`
`determine if the defendant violated that duty. lg; See aiso, Zamstein v. Marvasti, 240
`
`Conn. 549, 558, 692 A.2d 781 (1997). “If a court determines, as a matter of law, that
`
`a defendant owes no duty to a plaintiff, the plaintiff cannot recover in negligence
`
`from the defendant.” RK Constructors, 231 Conn. at 384.
`
`Duty is a iegal conclusion about relationships between individuals, made after
`
`the fact, and is imperative to a negligence cause of action. Murdock v. Croughwell,
`
`268 Conn. 559, 566, 848 A.2d 363 (2004). Thus,
`
`there can be no actionable
`
`negligence unless there exists a cognizable duty of care. Id The test for the
`
`existence of a legal duty of care entails:
`
`(1) a determination of whether an ordinary person in the
`defendant's position, knowing what the defendant knew
`or should have known, would anticipate that harm of the
`general nature of that suffered was likely to result, and
`(2) a determination, on the basis of a public policy
`analysis, of whether the defendant's responsibility for its
`negligent conduct
`should extend to the particular
`consequences or particular plaintiff in the case. .
`.
`
`12
`
`
`
`lci_. With respect to the public policy analysis, there generaliy is no duty that obligates
`
`one party to aid or protect another party. Id quoting Restatement (Second), Torts §
`
`314 (1965). One exception to this general rule arises when a definite relationship
`
`between the parties is of such a character that public policyjustifies the imposition of
`
`a duty to aid or to protect another. l_gL quoting W. Prosser & W. Keeton, Q (5th
`
`Ed. 1984) § 56, pp. 373-74; and Restatement (Second), Torts §§ 314A, 315. “The
`
`fact that the actor realizes or should realize that action on his part is necessary for
`
`another's aid or protection does not of itself impose upon him a duty to take such
`
`action.” See, Restatement (Second), Torts § 314. “The ultimate test of the existence
`
`of a duty to use reasonable care is found in the foreseeability that harm may result if
`
`it is not exercised .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`(internal citations and quotation marks omitted) Burns V. Bd.
`
`
`of Educ. of Stamford 228 Conn. 640, 647, A.2d 1
`
`(1994) (overruled on other
`
`grounds).
`
`Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a—490(c) defines a “residential care home" and
`
`provides:
`
`“Residential care home”, “nursing home" or “rest home"
`means an establishment
`that furnishes,
`in single or
`
`food and shelter to two or more
`multiple facilities,
`persons unrelated to the proprietor and,
`in addition,
`
`13
`
`
`
`provides services that meet a need beyond the basic
`provisions of food, shelter and laundry;
`
`The State of Connecticut has promulgated Regulations of State Agencies
`
`classifying, defining, and establishing requirements for a variety of institutions.
`
`Pursuant to the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies § 19-13-D6(17):
`
`"Residential Care Home" means an institution that
`
`is
`
`the
`of
`(c)
`19a-490
`to section
`pursuant
`licensed
`Connecticut General Statutes having facilities and all
`necessary personnel to furnish food,- shelter and laundry
`for two or morepersons unrelated to the proprietor and in
`addition, providing services of a personal nature which do
`not
`reguire the training or skills of a licensed nurse.
`Additional services of a personal nature may include
`assistance with bathing, help with dressing, preparation
`of sP!‘3.Cial diets and supervision over medications which
`are Mseiféadministereol,
`or
`the
`administration
`of
`medications pursuant to subsection 19-13-D6 (m)(2) of
`the Regulations
`of Connecticut
`State Agencies;
`(emphasis added};
`
`Compare a residential care home to a nursing home or a rest home with nursing
`
`supervision as defined in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-521:
`
`y
`
`“Nursing home facility" means any nursing home or any
`rest home with nursing supervision that provides nursing
`supervision under a medical director twenty-four hours
`per day, or any chronic and convalescent nursing home
`that provides
`skilled
`nursing
`care under medical
`
`14
`
`
`
`supervision and direction to carry out nonsurgical
`treatment and dietary procedures for chronic diseases,
`convalescent
`stages,
`acute diseases
`or
`injuries;
`
`(emphasis added).
`
`Lastly, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-184b defines “health care provider" as "any person,
`
`corporation, facility or institution licensed by this state to provide health care.or
`
`professional services, or an officer, employee or agent thereof acting in the course
`
`and scope of his employment." (emphasis added).
`
`Here, Greystone is licensed as a residential care home pursuant to Conn
`
`Gen. Stat. § 19a~490(c). As such, Greystone furnishes food, shelter, and laundry to
`
`its residents. Greystone also provides recreational services, assistance with bathing,
`
`and help with dressing. As a residential care home, Greystone fostered personal
`
`independence in a home—|ike environment and residents, including Ms. Augeri, were
`
`allowed to come and go as they pleased. Unlike a nursing home or a rest home with
`
`nursing supervision, Greystone is not required to employ a licensed nurse or to
`
`provide nursing supervision under a medical director. Moreover, Greystone is not
`
`licensed by the State to provide healthcare to its residents as defined in § 52—184b.
`
`Although Greystone voluntarily employed a registered nurse, she worked only part-
`
`time and provided only basic care, such as checking weight, blood sugars,
`
`15
`
`
`
`temperature, and blood pressure. Because Greystone is licensed as a residential
`
`care home, not a health care provider,
`
`it had no duty to provide nursing care to its
`
`residents.
`
`Greystone also had no duty to evaluate residents in order to determine if they
`
`were a suicide risk.
`
`In December 2013, when Ms. Zeoli learned that Ms. Augeri
`
`“wanted to die and jump off the bridge,” she notified Mobile Crisis, who ultimately
`
`determined that Ms. Augeri was not a threat to herself. Middlesex Hospital and its
`
`Mobile Crisis Unit then cleared the decedent to live and remain at Greystone with its
`
`requisite level of care. The facility was assured that Ms. Augeri was not a suicide risk
`
`and that Greystone would not have to adopt any additional procedures to prevent a
`
`suicide. An ordinary person in Greystone’s position, knowing what the facility and its
`
`staff knew, i.e. that Ms. Augeri was not a suicide risk, would not anticipate or foresee
`
`that she would then later commit suicide. Even after the December 2013 incident
`
`occurred, Greystone still had no legal duty to determine whether Ms. Augeri was a
`
`threat to herself.
`
`With respect to the existence of a legal duty and the public policy analysis, as
`
`indicated above, there generally is no duty that obligates one party to aid or protect
`
`another party. One exception is when a definite relationship between the parties is of
`
`16
`
`
`
`such a character that public policy justifies the imposition of a duty to aid or to
`
`protect another. Here,
`
`there was no definite relationship between the parties
`
`justifying the imposition of a duty because, again, Greystone, as a residential care
`
`home, fostered personal independence. Although the facility maintained sign-in and
`
`sign-out sheets, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased, and the
`
`facility couid not and did not prevent residents from leaving. When Ms. Augeri signed
`
`out of the facility on February 19, 2014 to go to a doctor’s appointment, Greystone
`
`did not have a legal duty to prevent her from leaving or to evaluate whether she was
`
`a suicide risk before she left. Because Greystone and its staff did not have a
`
`cognizable duty of care to provide nursing services -or
`
`to determine whether
`
`residents were suicide risks, there can be no actionable negligence. Therefore,
`
`Greystone cannot be liable to the plaintiff's decedent’s estate, and they are entitled
`
`to summaryjudgment as a matter of law.
`
`III.
`
`CONCLUSION:
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the defendants, Greystone Rest Home, Inc. d/b/a
`
`Greystone Retirement Home (hereinafter “Greystone"), Crystal Player, Luel
`
`lrene
`
`Swanson, Lucille Irene Swanson, and Ashtin Zeoli, respectfully request that this
`
`17
`
`
`
`Court grant
`
`their Motion for Summary Judgment as to the plaintiff's second
`
`Amended Compiaint dated January 27, 2016.
`
`DEFENDANTS,
`GREYSTONE REST HOME, INC.
`DIB/Al GREYSTONE RETIREMENT
`
`HOME; CRYSTAL PLAYER; LUEL
`IRENE SWANSON; LUCELLE IRENE
`SWANSON; AND ASHTEN ZEOLI
`
`By:
`
`Isl 407831
`James F. Suliivan, Esq.
`Howard Kohn Sprague & Fitzgerald
`23? Buckingham Street
`Hartford, CT 06106 '
`Juris No: 028160
`
`Telephone: 860-525-3101
`Fax: 8602474201
`ifs@hksf|aw.com
`
`18
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION
`
`I hereby certify that this pleading complies with the requirements of Practice
`Book § 4-? and a copy of the foregoing was mailed, U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, or
`electronically delivered pursuant to Practice Book § 10-13 to all counsel and pro se
`parties of record who have given written consent for electronic delivery, as follows
`on this 23”‘ day of July, 2016.
`
`Jose M. Rojas, Esq.
`Rojas Law Firm
`40 Russ Street
`
`Hartford, CT 06106
`
`Paul Levin, Esq.
`Law Offices of Paul Levin
`
`40 Russ Street
`
`Hartford, CT 06106
`
`Nicole A. Demers, Esq.
`AG-Civil RightslTorts
`55 Elm Stree, P.O. Box 120
`Hartford, CT 06141
`
`Isl
`
`407831
`
`James F. Sullivan
`
`Commissioner of Superior Court
`
`19
`
`
`
`ET A
`%
`”
`%
`
`
`
`DOCKET NO.: IVIMX-C\/'—’I5-80’I4578—S
`
`:
`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`MARILYN DELINE, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
`ESTATE OF DENISE AUGERI
`‘.
`
`vs,
`
`I
`
`GREYSTONE REST. HOME, INC. D/B/A
`GREYSTONE RETIREMENT HOME;
`CRYSTAL PLAYER; LUEL IRENE SWANSON;
`LUCILLE IRENE SWANSON; AND
`ASHTIN ZEOLI
`
`:
`
`:
`
`.J.D. OF i\/IIDDLETOWN
`
`AT IVIIDDLETOWN
`
`JUNE 23, 2015
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF LUEL ERENE SWANSON
`
`STATE OF CONNECTICUT
`
`.
`COUNTY OF IVIIDDLESEX :
`
`ss:
`
`Portland, Connecticut
`(Town)
`
`I, Luei Irene Swanson, a defendant in the above-captioned action, being duiy sworn,
`
`do hereby depose and state:
`
`‘I.
`
`I am over the age of 18 and am competent to take an oath.
`
`2.
`
`I am a defendant in a lawsuit commenced by I\/iariiyn Deiine, Administrator of the
`
`Estate of Denise Augeri.
`
`3.
`
`Iviariiyn Deiine commenced this lawsuit against the above-captioned defendants
`
`after her daughter. Denise Augeri, jumped off the Arrigoni Bridge in Iviiddietown, Connecticut
`
`and kiiled herseif.
`
`. 4. Prior to the decedent, Ms. Augerfs. death, she was a resident of Greystone Rest
`
`Home, Inc. dlb/a Greystone Retirement Home (hereinafter “Greystone”).
`
`HOWARD, KUHN SPRAGUE 8:. FITZGERALD, LLP -> ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW
`237 BUCKINGHAM STREET ° P.O. BOX 261798 0 HARTFORD, CT 06126-1798 - (860) 525-3101 I JURIS NO. 28160
`
`
`
`5.
`
`I am the Administrator of Greystone.
`
`6. Greystone is licensed by the State of Connecticut as a residential care home located
`
`in Portland, Connecticut.
`
`i
`
`I
`
`'
`
`.7‘. Greystone.offers housing and care for residents who require more than congregate
`
`‘nousing, but who. by no means, have a current need for nursing/convalescent home care.
`
`8. Greystone sometimes takes in residents who have severe physical, emotional,
`
`psychological, and/or psychiatric disorders.
`
`9. Greystone is not a medical facility.
`
`10. Greystone’s regulations foster personal independence in a home—like environment.
`
`11. Greystone provides food, shelter, laundry, and other services, such as recreational
`
`services, which do not require the training or skills of a licensed nurse.
`
`' ’12.
`
`At the time of the Ms. Augeri’s death, Greystone voluntarily employed a
`
`registered nurse so that Greystone and family members of the residents would have piece of
`
`mind.
`
`13. H: The nurse. worked oniy parttime from 8:00 am. to 12:00 p.m. and provided only
`
`basic care, which included checking weight, blood sugars, temperature, and blood pressure.
`
`14.
`
`These basic services could be refused by residents.
`
`15.a/Additional services provided included assistance with bathing and help with
`
`1*.)
`
`HOWARD, KOHN SPRAGUE & FITZGERALD, LLP « ATTORNEYS—AT-LAW
`237 BUCI-(!NGHA|\fi STREET = P.O. BOX 261798 ° HARTFORD, CT 08126-1798 - (860) 5253101 ° JURKS ND, 28160
`
`
`
`dressing.
`
`16. On or about_January 2012, Greystone had a resident commit suicide by entering
`
`a nearby river.
`
`1?. Because ofthe 2012 incident, Greystone scrupulously screened potential residents
`during the application process by inquiring about past attempts of suicide and suicidal
`
`ideatioiss.
`
`18. Before becoming a resident, the decedent; Ms. Augeri, underwent an initial
`
`interview and a pre—residency screening process.
`
`19. During the initiai interview,‘ Ms. Augeri’s mental health care worker, Mary Carter,
`
`failed to disclose to Greystone that the decedent had suicidal ideations even though Ms.
`
`Carter knewthat Ms. Augeri had attempted on two previous occasions to jump off the Arrigoni
`
`Bridge in Middletown, Connecticut.
`
`20. If the decedent, Ms. Carter, the decendents physician, Dr. Ryan'Boutin, and her
`
`psychiatrist, Dr. Nikolai Lieders had mentioned anything regarding suicide attempts or suicidal
`
`ideations, Greystone would not have allowed i\/ls. Augeri to live at the home.
`21. On September 10, 2013, Ms. Augeri became a resident at Greystone.
`
`22. During l\/‘ls. Augerts stay, she commented that she really liked Greystone and was
`
`happy at the home.
`
`t__t_,i
`
`-
`
`HOWARD, KOHN SPRAGUE 3» FITZGERALD, LLF‘ - ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW
`237 BUCKINGHAM STREET = 9.0. BOX 251798 -1 HARTFORD, CT 06126-1 798 I (860) 525-3101 6 JURIS NC}. 28160
`
`
`
`i 23. After Ms. Augeri was treated by ll/lobiie Crisis on December 10, 2013, she was
`
`cieared by Midcliesex l-lospitai to live and remain at Greystorie with its requisite level of care.
`
`24. Greystone was assured that Ms. Augeri was not a suicide risk and that the facility
`
`wouid not have to adopt any additional procedures to prevent a suicide
`
`25.-Greystone maintained sign-in and sign—out sheets, however. the facility, as a
`
`residential care home. ceuld not and did not restrict residents from leaving.
`
`I 26. On February 19. 2014, Ms.
`
`/-‘kugeri signed out of Greystone in good spirits at
`
`approximateiy 8:15 am. in order to go to a doctor’s appointment in New Haven.
`
`27. Ms. Augeri left in a taxi cab, but she had the taxi cab drop her off at a Dunkin
`
`Donuts in Portland.
`
`28. Ms. Augeri then walked to the l\/liddletown side of the Arrigoni Bridge and jumped
`
`off.
`
`i
`
`'
`
`' 29. After l\/ls. Augerrs death, the Connec:ticutDepartrnent of Health and the ll/liddletown
`
`Police Department conducted a thorough investigation and cieared Greystone of any
`
`responsibility for her death.
`
`HOWARD, KOHN SPRAGLIE 8: FITZGERALD, LLP =1 ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW
`237’ BUCKINGHAM STREET - PO. BOX. 261798 0 HARTFORD, CT 06126-1798 ° (850) 525-3101 ° JURIS NO. 25150
`
`
`
`CERTEFICATION
`
`
`
`
`
`el Ire nesfimarrsen-M“
`
`M
`.
`.
`Subscribed and sworn to before me on this 3-!
`
`sf" .
`day of
`
`gr
`:1 7/
`
`‘
`, 2016.
`
`
`
`Notary Pubtic
`My Commission Expires:
`
`DOUGLAS PREVflE.5E"r-
`N&’1‘ARY .PU3LIe
`MY commssron EXPIRES MAY 3% gag M
`
`‘-2’:
`
`.¢4\TTORNEYS«AT-LAW
`Howmo, KOHN SPRAGuE & FITZGERALD, LLP =-
`237 BUCKINGHAM STREET ~ Po. Box 261793 - HARTFORD, CT 06126-1798 « (860) 525-3101 s JURIS NO. 28160
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DGCKET NQ; MMX-CV41 5—60’l4578~S
`
`:
`
`SUPERTOR COURT
`
`MARILYN DELENE, ADMINTSTRATOR OF THE
`ESTATE OF DENISE. AUGEF{l
`:
`
`$5.01: IVIIDDLETOWN
`
`VS.
`
`'
`
`'
`
`I
`
`,
`
`GREYETQNE REST. HOME, TNC. DIBIA
`GREYSTONE RETIREMENT HOME;
`CRYSTAL PLAYER; LUEL TRENE SWANSON;
`LUCILLE IRENE SWANSON; AND
`ASHTTN ZEOLI
`
`2
`
`:
`
`AT EVIIDDLETOWN
`
`E
`T
`JULY15, 2016
`
`AFFIDAWT OF ASHTIN ZEOLI
`
`STATE ‘OF CONNECTICUT:
`-
`.
`COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX :
`
`ss:
`
`Portland, Connecticut
`a (Town)
`'
`
`_
`
`l, Ashtln Zeoli, a defendant in the above—captioned action, being duly sworn, do
`
`herehy depose and state:
`
`‘I.
`
`2.
`
`I am over the age of 18 and am competent to take an oath.
`
`I am a defendant in a lawsuit commenced by Marilyn Deline, Administrator of the
`
`Estate of Denise Augeri.
`
`I 3. Marilyn Deline commenced this lawsuit against the above—captioned defendants
`I
`%
`atterher daughter, Denise Augeri, jumped off the Arrigoni Bridge in lvliddletown, Connecticut
`
`and killed herself.
`
`4. Before the decedent, lllis. Augerfs, death, she was a resident of Greystone Rest
`
`Home, Inc. dible Greystene Retirement Home (hereinafter “Greyst-tans”).
`
`
`
`'5. I was a regiatered nurse at Greystone at the time of Ms. Augerts death.
`
`6. On December 10, 2013, I received a telephone can tram a doctors effice tailing
`
`me that Ma. Augeri was upset because her ride to the dectefs affine was cancetted due te
`
`T the weather.
`
`?. t was aiso ‘said that Ms. Augeri commented that she was “done and wanted to die
`
`and jump off the bridge.”
`
`8.
`
`l notified the Mobile Crisis Unit, who came and evaluated Ms. Augeri.
`
`9. Mobtie Crisis then tetd me that Ms. Augeri was not a threat to herself.
`
`I 10: Wichita Crisis also gave Ms. Augeri a mobile crisis teieahone number to call.
`
`
`
`CERWFICATEON
`
`
`
`fish
`
`fin Zena‘; ‘“
`
`Suisacribed and sworn in before me on this
`
`day of
`
`2016.
`
`
`
`..
`
`
`
` .. FAME“ .
`__ Notary Pubflc.State ofconnectieut
`My Commission Expires Feb. 28. 2021 f
`
`.___
`
`_