Begley v. State, 234 Conn. App. 820 (2025)

Citation: Begley v. State, 234 Conn. App. 820 (2025)
Parent Document: Begley v. State, 234 Conn. App. 820 (2025)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2025-09-02
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10664577/begley-v-state/ ↗

Full Text

2,300 chars

issues of material fact existed [as to the plaintiff’s claim
that his transfer was retaliation by the defendant for
the plaintiff’s filing of the report].’’ Following a hearing,
the court granted the plaintiff’s motion to reargue but
denied the relief requested in his motion. This appeal
followed.
We begin by setting forth the following applicable
legal principles. ‘‘The standards governing our review
of a trial court’s decision to grant a motion for summary
judgment are well established. Practice Book [§ 17-49]
provides that 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. . . . In deciding a motion
for summary judgment, the trial court must view the
evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving
party. . . . 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.’’ (Internal
quotation marks omitted.) DiPietro v. Farmington
Sports Arena, LLC, 306 Conn. 107, 115–16, 49 A.3d 951
(2012). The standard of review of a trial court’s decision
granting a motion for summary judgment is plenary.
Id., 116.
‘‘[T]ypically [d]emonstrating a genuine issue requires
a showing of evidentiary facts or substantial evidence
outside the pleadings from which material facts alleged
in the pleadings can be warrantably inferred. . . .
Moreover, [t]o establish the existence of a material fact,
it is not enough for the party opposing summary judg-
ment merely to assert the existence of a disputed issue.
. . . Such assertions are insufficient regardless of
Page 8 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL 0, 0

Other Sections in This Document (38)

Full Text