Graham v. Comm'r of Transp., 330 Conn. 400

Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court considered whether the sovereign-immunity waiver in General Statutes § 13a-144 applies to a claim that state police failed to close an icy bridge before Department of Transportation personnel arrived. The court declined to overrule Lamb v. Burns and held that the waiver may extend to state employees performing highway-maintenance duties when a sufficient relationship with the Commissioner of Transportation establishes a breach of the commissioner's statutory duty. The court concluded that the record did not establish the required relationship between the commissioner and the state police and reversed in part.

Holdings

1. Section 13a-144 waives sovereign immunity for the actions of state employees other than Department of Transportation employees when those employees are performing duties related to highway maintenance and the plaintiff proves a relationship between the employee and the commissioner such that the commissioner can be found to have breached the statutory duty to keep highways, bridges, or sidewalks in repair.
2. Lamb v. Burns remains good law and should not be overruled.
3. The record did not establish a sufficient relationship between the state police and the Commissioner of Transportation to bring the alleged failure to close the bridge within § 13a-144's waiver of sovereign immunity.
4. The commissioner could not be held liable under § 13a-144 for the state police's failure to close the bridge because the requisite Lamb relationship was not established.

Questions Presented

1. Whether General Statutes § 13a-144 waives sovereign immunity for a defective-highway claim based on the alleged failure of state police employees to close an icy bridge.
2. Whether Lamb v. Burns should be overruled or limited concerning the statute's application to state employees other than Department of Transportation employees.
3. Whether the record established the relationship between the state police and the Commissioner of Transportation required under Lamb for the commissioner's statutory highway-maintenance duty to be implicated.
4. Whether the Appellate Court properly reversed summary judgment based on factual disputes concerning notice and the reasonableness of the commissioner's response.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded