`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`ORDER 412190
`
`WISNIEWSKI, DOROTA Et Al
`
` V.
`HARTFORD HEALTHCARE
`CORPORATION Et Al
`
`JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD
` AT HARTFORD
`
`2/19/2020
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDER REGARDING:
`09/27/2019 143.00 MOTION TO STRIKE
`
`Counsel of record
`
`The foregoing, having been heard by the Court, is hereby:
`
`ORDER: DENIED
`
`The plaintiff has moved to strike the defendants’ special defense of the statute of limitations. In
`accordance with Practice Book § 10-50, the statute of limitations must be raised by way of special
`defense. “A claim that an action is barred by the lapse of the statute of limitations must be pleaded as a
`special defense, not raised by a motion to strike.” Forbes v. Ballaro, 31 Conn. App. 235, 239, 624 A.2d
`389 (1993). Although Forbes v. Ballaro recites two exceptions to this general rule, neither one applies in
`the present case. Id. The resolution of the viability of this defense, as raised by the plaintiff’s motion to
`strike, is more appropriately raised by way of a motion for summary judgment.
`
`Judicial Notice (JDNO) was sent regarding this order.
`
`412190
`
`Judge: A SUSAN PECK
`
`This document may be signed or verified electronically and has the same validity and status as a document with a physical
`(pen-to-paper) signature. For more information, see Section I.E. of the State of Connecticut Superior Court E-Services
`Procedures and Technical Standards (https://jud.ct.gov/external/super/E-Services/e-standards.pdf), section 51-193c of the
`Connecticut General Statutes and Connecticut Practice Book Section 4-4.
`
`HHDCV166073070S 2/19/2020
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`
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
