Se Habla Español
Chúng Tôi Nói Tiếng Việt

Doe v. Rackliffe

lawyer using laptop

Court: Connecticut Supreme Court

Docket: SC20420

Opinion Date: August 24, 2021

Judge: Ecker

Areas of Law: Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the trial court rendering summary judgment in favor of Defendant, as executor of the estate of Robert Rackliffe, on the ground that Plaintiffs’ negligence claims were time-barred, holding that the extended limitation period set forth in Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-577d did not apply to the Plaintiffs’ negligence claims for personal injuries brought against the alleged perpetrator of a sexual assault.

Seven plaintiffs, each of whom was minors at the time of the alleged assaults, alleged that Rackliffe’s conduct constituted both intentional sexual assault and medical negligence. Defendant sought summary judgment as to the counts sounding in negligence, arguing that those counts were time-barred by Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-584. The trial court granted summary judgment as to all of the negligence counts. Plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their additional claims and appealed. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Plaintiff’s negligence claims were governed by the three-year limitation period set forth in section 52-584 and that section 52-577d did not apply to Plaintiffs’ claims.

This case law update is brought to you by Freeway Law auto accident and personal injury lawyers in Orange County. The following is not one of our cases, but it is of some significance, and we thought we should share it with our readers for informational purposes. The information above is for informational purposes only and not to be construed as legal advice.

What do you think?


We get paid when you do.

    Orange County Office:
    2090 N Tustin Ave Suite 250, Santa Ana, CA 92705

    (844) 44-FREEWAY | (844) 443-7339