DOCKET NO. NNH-CV23-6134228-S
`
`: SUPERIOR COURT
`
`SIRAH BEAL, ET AL.
`
`:
`
`J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
`
`Vv.
`
`: AT NEW HAVEN
`
`SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
`ILLINOIS
`
`: MAY 10, 2024
`
`MOTION FOR ORDER OF COMPLIANCE
`
`Pursuant to Practice Book §13-14, the Defendant hereby moves the Court for an Order o
`
`Compliance because the Plaintiffs have failed to fully respond to Standard Interrogatories an
`
`Requests for Production, dated October 3, 2023.
`
`I.
`
`FACTS
`
`This action arises from a June 20, 2021 motor vehicle accident. The Plaintiffs allege to have
`
`sustained personal injuries, mental anguish, frustration, anxiety, considerable medical expenses,
`
`inability to engage in usual occupation and/or all oflife’s activities. The Plaintiffs produced answers
`
`to Defendant’s request for standard initial discovery dated November 27, 2023 and supplement
`
`compliance thereafter. Recently, Defense Counsel sent a courtesy letter to Plaintiffs’ Counsel o
`
`March 19, 2024 (see attached Exhibit A) requesting outstanding discovery. To date, no furthe
`
`discovery has been provided. Therefore, it has come to the Defendant’s attention that discove
`
`remains outstanding and respectfully requests the following be produced (or sufficient authorization|
`
`to obtain such, after which Defense counsel will provide any records received through suc
`
`LAW OFFICES OF MEEHAN,DI PALMA, ROBERTS & TURRET
`P.O. BOX 6835, SCRANTON,PA 18505-6840 «© (203) 294-7800 e
`JURIS NO. 408308
`
`
`
`: SUPERIOR COURT
`
`SIRAH BEAL, ET AL.
`
`:
`
`J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
`
`Vv.
`
`: AT NEW HAVEN
`
`SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
`ILLINOIS
`
`: MAY 10, 2024
`
`MOTION FOR ORDER OF COMPLIANCE
`
`Pursuant to Practice Book §13-14, the Defendant hereby moves the Court for an Order o
`
`Compliance because the Plaintiffs have failed to fully respond to Standard Interrogatories an
`
`Requests for Production, dated October 3, 2023.
`
`I.
`
`FACTS
`
`This action arises from a June 20, 2021 motor vehicle accident. The Plaintiffs allege to have
`
`sustained personal injuries, mental anguish, frustration, anxiety, considerable medical expenses,
`
`inability to engage in usual occupation and/or all oflife’s activities. The Plaintiffs produced answers
`
`to Defendant’s request for standard initial discovery dated November 27, 2023 and supplement
`
`compliance thereafter. Recently, Defense Counsel sent a courtesy letter to Plaintiffs’ Counsel o
`
`March 19, 2024 (see attached Exhibit A) requesting outstanding discovery. To date, no furthe
`
`discovery has been provided. Therefore, it has come to the Defendant’s attention that discove
`
`remains outstanding and respectfully requests the following be produced (or sufficient authorization|
`
`to obtain such, after which Defense counsel will provide any records received through suc
`
`LAW OFFICES OF MEEHAN,DI PALMA, ROBERTS & TURRET
`P.O. BOX 6835, SCRANTON,PA 18505-6840 «© (203) 294-7800 e
`JURIS NO. 408308
`
`
`
`authorization):
`
`1) Recordsrelating to 9/8/19 prior loss (Geico Claim # 0048381040101023).
`
`II.
`
`LAW AND ARGUMENT
`
`Practice Book § 13-14 states in pertinentpart:
`
`. or has failed to respond to
`.
`If any party has failed to answer interrogatories .
`requests for production .
`.
`. the judicial authority may, on motion, make such order
`as the ends of justice require.
`
`Practice Book § 13-14
`
`“TThe] rules of discovery are designed to make a trial less a game of blindman’s bluff an
`
`v. DeMaio, 280 Conn. 168, 188-89 (2006) Gnternal quotations omitted). See also Rosenberg v.
`
`Castaneda, 38 Conn.App. 628, 632 (Conn.App. 1995); City of Hartford v. Anderson Fairoaks,Inc., 7
`
`Conn.App. 591, 600 (Conn.App. 1986); Sturdivant v. Yale-New Haven Hospital, 2 Conn.App. 103,
`
`106 (Conn.App. 1984); Quiros v. Elderhouse, Inc., 2014 WL 2255314 at *4 (Conn.Supp. Apr. 25,
`
`
`2014); Davis v. Elrac, LLC, 2014 WL 2251603 at *2 (Conn.Supp. Apr. 24, 2014). “Nothing could be
`
`more basic and necessary for the defendants to have to give them a fair chance of defending
`
`themselves at trial.” Vanalstyne v. Town of Tolland, 2009 WL 940947 at *3 (Conn.Supp. Mar. 11,
`
`mote a fair contest with the basic issues and facts disclosed to the fullest practicable extent.” Wexle
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2009).
`
`Further, the “Practice Book mandates full broad discovery prior to trial so as to avoid tri
`
`by ambush and allow all parties to have sufficient information to access the weaknesses an
`
`strengths to their particular claims.”
`
`St. George v. Sanfilippo, 2009 WL 4683769 at *1 (Conn.Supp.
`
`Nov. 12, 2009). The purpose of discovery is not only to preventtrial by ambush, but also to provide
`
`LAW OFFICES OF MEEHAN,DI PALMA, ROBERTS & TURRET
`P.O. BOX 6835, SCRANTON,PA 18505-6840 «© (203) 294-7800 e
`JURIS NO. 408308
`
`
`
`
`the parties with all information needed to explore any possible settlement before trial. Sherman v.
`
`Axelrod, 49 Conn.Supp. 265, 271 (Feb. 10, 2005).
`
`III.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`WHEREFORE,the Defendantrequests this Court to rule the following relief:
`
`1. Enter an order requiring the Plaintiffs to adequately respondto said requests;
`
`2. Order any andall furtherrelief that the court may deem necessary.
`
`THE DEFENDANT,
`SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
`ILLINOIS
`
`/s/433656
`BY.
`Denise Penn
`Law Offices of Meehan, Di Palma,
`Roberts & Turret
`P.O. Box 6835
`Scranton, PA 18505-6840
`Tel. # 203-294-7800
`Juris # 408308
`
`LAW OFFICES OF MEEHAN,DI PALMA, ROBERTS & TURRET
`P.O. BOX 6835, SCRANTON,PA 18505-6840 «© (203) 294-7800 e
`JURIS NO. 408308
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION
`
`Thisis to certify that all personal identifying information was redacted pursuant to
`
`Practice Book Section 4-7.
`
`‘This will further certify the foregoing was mailed via U.S. Mail, postage
`
`pre-paid or electronically delivered pursuant to Practice Book Section 10-14 on this 10th day of
`
`May, 2024.
`
`Attorney for Plaintitts:
`R.J. Weber, Esq.
`Weber & Rubano, LLC
`401 Center Street
`Wallingford, CT 06492
`rweber@rjwlawyet.com
`
`/s/433656
`Denise Penn
`Commissioner of the Superior Court
`
`LAW OFFICES OF MEEHAN,DI PALMA, ROBERTS & TURRET
`P.O. BOX 6835, SCRANTON,PA 18505-6840 «© (203) 294-7800 e
`JURIS NO. 408308
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`NANCY A. MEEHAN
`RESIDENT ATTORNEY
`
`VINCENT DI PALMA
`ERIK ROBERTS
`ANDREW S. TURRET
`LISA BARRY
`SEAN T. CAREW
`JESALYN COLE
`JOANNA M. CZEKAJEWSKI
`LINSEY D. DEDOMENICO
`LOUISE DICOCCO
`JAMES FRAGUELA
`STACEY FRANCOLINE
`LAWRENCE GALLINA
`COLIN R. GIBSON
`GARY W. HOHENTHAL
`STEPHEN LEARY
`
`LAW OFFICES OF
`MEEHAN, DI PALMA, ROBERTS & TURRET
`EMPLOYEES OF LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP, INC.
`
`MAILING ADDRESS
`P.O. BOX 6835
`SCRANTON, PA 18505
`
`PHYSICAL ADDRESS
`108 LEIGUS ROAD, 1ST FLOOR
`WALLINGFORD, CONNECTICUT 06492
`
`TELEPHONE: (203) 294 7800 FACSIMILE: (603)427 2666
`SERVICE OF PLEADINGS: LMLAWCT@LIBERTYMUTUAL.COM
`
`DENNIS MAUTNER
`MARY ANN MCCLUSKEY
`SCOTT M. MCGOWAN
`THOMAS MULLANEY III
`ADWOA S. NKRUMAH
`DENISE PENN
`CHRISTOPHER J. POWDERLY
`MICHAEL ROMANELLI JR
`CHRISTOPHER RUSSO
`KEITH STURGES
`ALAN S. TOBIN
`ROBERT VONTELL
`MARIAN H. YUN
`
`R.J. Weber III Esq.
`Weber & Rubano, LLC
`401 Center Street
`Wallingford, CT 06492
`
`
`
`March 19, 2024
`
`RE: Sirah Beal, et al. v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
` Claim no. LA163-046029346-0006
`
`Dear Attorney Weber:
`
`Upon review of your Clients discovery compliance, I have noted that we are missing records
`relating to your Clients 9/8/19 prior loss (Geico Claim # 0048381040101023). As you know, it is
`critical that all relevant documentation be provided in order to come to a just end in this matter. Please
`provide the above discovery compliance, or sufficient authorization to obtain such, upon receipt of this
`letter, so as to avoid the need for any further motion practice herein. Thank you for your time and
`anticipated cooperation.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Very truly yours,
`Denise Penn
`Denise Penn
`
`
`
`
`DP/ap
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
