Traylor v. State

Sylvester Traylor v. State of Connecticut et al

No. X03HHDCV165042400S

Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Hartford, Hartford, Complex Litigation Docket

June 6, 2017

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE STATE DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT (#130.00)

Ingrid L. Moll, Judge

Before the court is the motion to dismiss dated June 8, 2016, filed by defendants State of Connecticut, the Connecticut Appellate Court, Connecticut Superior Court Judges Emmet L. Cosgrove Terence A. Zemetis, Kari A. Dooley, and James W. Abrams, and former Connecticut Superior Court Judge Thomas F. Parker (" Parker"), (collectively, " the State defendants"), directed to the plaintiff's amended complaint dated April 19, 2016, insofar as it is directed to them (" motion") (#130.00). Specifically, the State defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims are barred by: (1) sovereign immunity; (2) absolute judicial immunity (3) collateral estoppel; (4) statutory immunity; (5) qualified immunity; (6) lack of a private cause of action and (7) nonjusticiability. The plaintiff, Sylvester Traylor (" the plaintiff' or " Mr. Traylor") ^[1] did not file a memorandum of opposition and did not appear at the February 6, 2017 hearing on the motion. For the reasons stated below, the court grants the State defendants' motion.

I BACKGROUND

The instant action is one of more than a dozen lawsuits brought by the plaintiff stemming from the tragic death of his late wife, Roberta, in 2004.^[2] The plaintiff alleges, among other things, that Roberta's psychiatrist, defendant Bassam Awwa, M.D. (" Awwa"), and his practice, Connecticut Behavioral Health Associates P.C. (" CBHA") (together, the " Awwa defendants"), acted negligently in their psychiatric treatment of Roberta and spoliated evidence after her death. The plaintiff alleges that defendants Robert Knowles, Neil Knowles, and Advanced Telemessaging (collectively, the " Knowles defendants"), who at the relevant times operated a telephone answering service for Awwa's practice, also spoliated evidence after Roberta's death by destroying records, including information concerning telephone calls placed by the plaintiff to Awwa shortly before her death.^[3]

The plaintiff's claims against the State defendants, set forth in count one and, as to former Superior Court Judge Parker only, in count five, generally challenge various alleged acts and/or omissions by such defendants during certain of his prior lawsuits. Most of his claims challenge judicial decision-making and/or other acts/omissions in: (1) Traylor v. Awwa, Superior court, judicial district of New London, Docket No. KNL-CV06-5001159-S (described below as the " 2006 Action"); (2) Traylor v State, Superior Court, judicial district of New London, Docket No. KNL-CV09-4009523-S (described below as the " 2009 Action"); (3) Traylor v. Awwa, Docket No. FST-CV11-5015139-S (described below as the " 2011 Action"); and (4) Traylor v. Gerratana, Superior Court, judicial district of Hartford, Docket No. HHD-CV11-5035895-S (" Gerratana Action").

In order to put the instant action in its proper context, the court provides the following procedural background of the 2006, 2009, 2011, and Gerratana Actions.

2006 Action

The plaintiff brought his initial suit in 2006. See Traylor v. Awwa, Superior Court, judicial district of New London, Docket No. CV 06-5001159-S (" 2006 Action"). The court in the 2011 Action, described below, summarized the history of the 2006 Action as follows:

In the 2006 case the plaintiff alleged that Awwa was negligent in several ways including that he prescribed certain medications which were inappropriate for Roberta and that he failed to adequately inform her of the risks associated with the medications he prescribed, and that he failed to supervise, monitor or otherwise follow through with the plaintiff concerning his wife's suicidal behavior. The plaintiff specifically alleged that he called Awwa and CBHA, in the days leading up to Roberta's death, concerning her indications that she was suicidal and a danger to herself but that the plaintiff received no return calls. The plaintiff specifically alleged that Awwa and CBHA were negligent in that they refused to return his phone calls concerning the increased suicidal behavior of Roberta. The plaintiff's complaint was brought both in his individual capacity and his capacity as duly appointed administrator of the estate of his late wife.

On July 12, 2010 the plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint in the 2006 case which sounded in eight counts. The first six counts of that Amended Complaint were based upon various medical malpractice claims against each of the 2006 defendants. The Seventh Count alleged that the 2006 defendants (which did not include the Knowles defendants) had spoliated evidence and the Eighth Count alleged that the 2006 defendants had violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA). On July 29, 2010 then Judge Trial Referee, Thomas F. Parker entered an order dismissing Counts One through Six of the July 12, 2010 Amended Complaint. On August 11, 2010 Judge Parker filed a Memorandum of Decision articulating the basis for his order dismissing Counts One through Six. While the court will not recite the details of the Judge Parker's August 11, 2010 Memorandum of Decision it is fair to say that a significant component of the twenty-eight-page decision was the Court's view that the original complaint did not contain a certificate that complied with Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-190a which required a certificate of good faith with a medical opinion. The Court's decision acknowledged that a medical opinion dated October 18, 2006 was obtained on that date. The Court's decision was based on its determination that the subsequently obtained medical opinion could not rescue the plaintiff's action that was brought approximately four months prior to the time that the plaintiff obtained the medical opinion . It is fair to say that the plaintiff disagrees with the substance of the Court's August 11, 2010 Memorandum of Decision. Subsequently, the 2006 Court granted the defendant's Motion to Strike the seventh and eighth counts of the Amended Complaint. On October 5, 2010 the court (Parker, J.T.R.) denied the defendants' Motions for Non-Suit and on February 15, 2011 the court (Parker, J.T.R.) dismissed counts seven and eight .

The plaintiff filed an appeal to the Appellate Court but that appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Court on December 19, 2011. The plaintiff filed a petition for certification to the Connecticut Supreme Court on December 29, 2011 but that petition was denied by the Connecticut Supreme Court on January 27, 2012; effectively ending the 2006 case.

(Emphasis added; footnote omitted.) Traylor v. Awwa, No. FST-CV11-5015359-S, 2016 WL 7165563, at *1-2 (Conn.Super. Oct. 26, 2016) (Genuario, J.).

2009 Action

While the above litigation was pending, the plaintiff filed the 2009 Action by way of a writ of mandamus. The plaintiff sought thereby to undo certain rulings in the 2006 Action, including a court order by Judge Abrams opening a default judgment. Then-Judge Parker dismissed the suit; the Appellate Court affirmed the dismissal; and the Supreme Court denied certification.

2011 Action

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the plaintiff filed the 2011 Action, the procedural background of which has been previously summarized as follows:

In January 2011 . . . the plaintiff brought [the 2011 Action] returnable to the New London Superior Court against multiple defendants.^[4] That complaint alleged, in part that the various state actors and certain private parties had discriminated against the plaintiff in violation of federal law because of his inter-racial marriage to Roberta. (The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is black and Roberta was white.) The case was removed to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on January 25, 2011 (See Traylor v. Awwa et al., United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (New Haven) Docket #3:11cv-00132-AWT). After various proceedings in federal court the case was dismissed or judgment entered in favor of ten of the thirteen defendants. The United States District Court then remanded the remaining state court claims against the Knowles defendants [who were not represented by counsel in federal court] for adjudication in state court on March 23, 2015 (federal court docket #431) which order was confirmed after re-argument on June 10, 2015 (federal court docket #442) . . .

(Footnote in original; second footnote omitted.) Traylor v. Awwa, No. FST-CV11-5015359-S, 2016 WL 7165563, at *2 (Conn. Super. Oct. 26, 2016).

While the 2011 Action was pending in federal court, the district court granted, among other things, a motion to dismiss filed by the Awwa defendants, which was directed to all counts against them. See Traylor v. Awwa, No. 3:11-cv-00132 (AWT), Ruling on Motion to Dismiss (D.Conn. Sept. 26, 2012) (Thompson, J.). (A copy of the district court's decision was attached as Exhibit C to the Awwa defendants' moving papers. (See #152.00.); The plaintiff took an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which was eventually dismissed and which prompted the following warning to the plaintiff by that court:

[C]ontinued filing of frivolous appeals or motions may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a leave-to-file sanction. See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993). Traylor v. Awwa, No. 15-912, Order (Doc. #68) (2d Cir. Nov. 19, 2015) (a copy of such order is included in this record at #131.00, Ex. 23).

The federal district remanded the case to the Superior Court for proceedings involving the Knowles defendants, and the case was transferred...