Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT CLEAN WASTE, INC. Plaintiff vs. THE CONNECTICUT INDEMNITY CO., et al. Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:02 CV 2105 (RNC)
JULY 2, 2007
DEFENDANT BRUEN DELDIN DIDIO ASSOCIATES, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT The Defendant Bruen Deldin Didio Associates, Inc. ("BDD") hereby moves for summary judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, against the Plaintiff Clean Waste, Inc. ("Clean Waste") as to all of the claims set forth against BDD in Clean Waste's Complaint, dated November 1, 2002. Summary Judgment is warranted in favor of BDD where there are no genuine issues of material fact and Clean Waste's claims must fail as a matter of law. The allegations against BDD are set forth in the Third Count and: (1) relate to conduct during the process of procuring the underlying insurance policy (the "Policy") issued by the Defendant The Connecticut Indemnity Company ("CIC"), which process was concluded before December 31, 1999 (¶¶ 68, 69(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e)); and (2) relate to conduct during the process of renewing the Policy, which began after the underlying loss of Johan Fourie (the "Fourie Loss") occurred in April, 2000 (¶¶ 69(a), (f), (g), (h) and (i)). Summary ORAL ARGUMENT IS REQUESTED
Page 2 of 3
Judgment should be granted as to the first group of allegations because BDD was not involved in this matter until December 31, 1999, when it purchased the assets of the Defendant, The Dunlap Connecticut Corp. ("Dunlap"). Summary Judgment should be granted as to the second group of allegations because, even if during the renewal process, BDD discovered the alleged errors that had been made when the Policy was initially issued by CIC, any correction to the Policy at that point would not have created coverage for the Fourie loss, which ha1d already occurred several months earlier. Thus, BDD necessarily could not have been the cause of any damages incurred by Clean Waste and judgment should issue in favor of BDD as a matter of law. Affidavits, sworn deposition testimony and a Memorandum of Law in Support of Summary Judgment are submitted herewith. THE DEFENDANT, BRUEN DELDIN DIDIO, ASSOCIATES, INC.
/s/ Mary E.R. Bartholic Mary E.R. Bartholic (ct 17518) Cohn Birnbaum & Shea P.C. 100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 493-2200 Fax: (860) 727-0361 email@example.com
Page 3 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 2nd day of July, 2007 a copy of the foregoing Defendant Bruen Deldin Didio Associates, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the court's electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the court's CM/ECF System.
/s/ Mary E.R.. Bartholic Mary E.R. Bartholic
138641 v1 07765.001