Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Grimes v. Housing Authority, 242 Conn. 236 (1997)

Citation
Grimes v. Housing Authority, 242 Conn. 236 (1997)
Parent Document
Grimes v. Housing Authority, 242 Conn. 236 (1997)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
1997-07-29

Other Sections in This Document (48)

Full Text

944 chars
It is correct, as the plaintiffs concede, that the complaint in this case is predicated on a different legal theory. In this case, the plaintiffs seek damages based on the defendant’s negligence. In Connelly, the plaintiffs sought damages and other relief based upon the defendant’s continuing violation of § 47a-7 (a) and the New Haven housing code. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressed this precise issue in Cullen v. Margiotta, supra, 811 F.2d 719, when it held, “we do not regard the fact that the state court action was premised on different legal theories as a reason not to apply American Pipe & Construction Co. tolling to save the claims of class members who were not named plaintiffs in the state court action. It is not a flaw under that doctrine that the first action did not alert the defendant to have its lawyers research the *247applicability of a particular statute or rule of common law . . . .”