`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`ORDER 412190
`
`KELLY, MARK
`
` V.
`NOLAN-WALLACE, JAY Et Al
`
`JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD
` AT HARTFORD
`
`10/29/2019
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDER REGARDING:
`09/25/2019 101.00 MOTION TO STRIKE
`
`The foregoing, having been considered by the Court, is hereby:
`
`ORDER: DENIED
`
`"Although there is a difference between negligence and a reckless disregard of the rights or safety of
`others, a complaint is not deficient so long as it utilizes language explicit enough to inform the court and
`opposing counsel that both negligence and reckless misconduct are being asserted. (Citations omitted;
`internal quotation marks omitted.) Craig v. Driscoll, 262 Conn. 312, 342-43, 813 A.2d 1003 (2003).
`Based on the allegations of the counts subject of the motion to strike, the plaintiff has sufficiently stated
`claims of statutory and common law recklessness along with a the prayer for punitive damages as a form
`of relief.
`
`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.
`
`HHDCV196117228S 10/29/2019
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`