On April 21, 2021 a
Hearing
was filed
involving a dispute between
Nancy Burton,
and
Bryan Hurlburt,Commissioner,Ct Dept Of Agriculture,
Building Department, Town Of Redding Ct,
Charles Dellarocco, Animal Control Officer,Ct Dept. Of Agriculture,
David Philip Mason,
Dennis Gibbon,
Department Of Agriculture,State Of Connecticut,
Elinore Carmody,
Health Department,Town Of Redding Ct Town Hall,Redding,
Julia Pemberton First Selectman,Town Or Redding,
Mark O'Donnell Chief Of Police,
Police Department,Town Of Redding Ct Town Hall,
Susan Winters,
Town Of Redding,Connecticut C O Town Clerk,
for M00 - Misc - Injunction
in the District Court of New Haven County.
Preview
NO: (X06) UWY-CV21-5028294-S SUPERIOR COURT
NANCY BURTON : COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET
v. : AT WATERBURY
DAVID PHILIP MASON, ET AL : NOVEMBER 5, 2021
OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO BIFURCATE HEARING
ON DEFENDANTS’SPECIAL MOTION TO DISMISS
The defendants, Elinore Carmody and Dennis Gibbons, pursuant to Conn. Gen.
Stat. § 52-196a, hereby object to the plaintiff’s motion (#251.00)1 to bifurcate the
hearing on their special motion to dismiss (#115.00 and #138.00). The obvious
purpose of the plaintiff’s motion is to further delay the completion of the hearing on the
defendants’ motion.
The Anti-SLAPP statute provides that: “The court shall conduct an expedited
hearing on a special motion to dismiss. The expedited hearing shall be held not later
than sixty days after the date of filing of such special motion to dismiss, unless, (A)
the court orders specified and limited discovery pursuant to subsection (d) of this
section. . . .” (Emphasis added). Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-196a(e)(1). The court has
1 The plaintiff’s motion was filed on June 2, 2021. However, her proposed
interrogatories and requests for production were not served on the defendants until
July 5, 2021. See (#129.00).
allowed Ms. Burton to conduct limited discovery as to the defendants’ complaints to
governmental authorities concerning her abuse and neglect of her goats. The
defendants responded to the discovery on September 17, 2021. They produced 35 e-
mails to various governmental authorities, and 46 complaints to the Redding Police
Department, complaining of Ms. Burton’s abuse and neglect of her goats. These
documents unequivocally establish, as a matter of law, that this lawsuit is based on the
defendants’ exercise of their right to petition the government on a matter of public
concern in violation of § 52-196a. Kaufmann v. Synnott, 2021 WL 4295356
(Conn.Super. 2021); see also Baity v. Mickley-Gomez, 2020 WL 9314537
(Conn.Super. 2020). The court has scheduled the hearing on the defendants’ special
motion to dismiss for November 8, 2021.
The decision to bifurcate proceedings lies solely within the discretion of the trial
court. Barry v. Quality Steel Products, Inc., 263 Conn. 424, 449, 820 A.2d 258 (2003).
Bifurcation would serve no useful purpose in this case. The parties have fully briefed
the issues as to both prongs of the analysis under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-196a.
Hearing argument on both prongs will not prejudice the plaintiff in any way. However,
bifurcating the hearing would prejudice the defendants in terms of additional time and
expense, and in delaying the ruling on the motion.
Wherefore, it is respectfully requested that the defendants’ objection to the
plaintiff’s motion to bifurcate be sustained.
2
DEFENDANTS,
ELINORE CARMODY AND DENNIS
GIBBONS
By_/s/ Philip T. Newbury, Jr. _________
Philip T. Newbury, Jr.
Howd & Ludorf, LLC
65 Wethersfield Avenue
Hartford, CT 06114-1121
(860) 249-1361
(860) 249-7665 (Fax)
Juris No.: 28228
E-mail: pnewbury@hl-law.com
3
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing Objection to Plaintiff’s Motion To
Bifurcate Hearing On Defendant’s Special Motion To Dismiss was or will
immediately be mailed or delivered electronically or non-electronically on November
5, 2021, to all parties and self-represented parties of record and that written consent
for electronic delivery was received from all attorneys and self-represented parties
receiving electronic delivery.
Nancy Burton Robert S. Hillson, II, Esquire
154 Highland Avenue Rubin and Rudman, LLP
Rowayton, CT 06853 53 State Street
NancyBurtonCT@aol.com Boston, MA 02109
rhillson@rubinrudman.com
James N. Tallberg, Esquire Steven J. Stafstrom, Jr., Esquire
Karsten & Tallberg, LLC Pullman & Comley, LLC
500 Enterprise Drive, Suite 4B 850 Main Street, P.O. Box 7006
Rocky Hill, CT 06067 Bridgeport, CT 06601
jtallberg@kt-lawfirm.com sstafstrom@pullcom.com
Jonathan E. Harding, Esquire Alexander W. Ahrens, Esquire
Matthew I. Levine, Esquire Melick & Porter
AG-Environment 900 Main Street South
165 Capitol Ave., 5th Floor Suite 102
Hartford, CT 06106 Southbury, CT 06488
Jonathan.harding@ct.gov aahrens@melicklaw.com
matthew.levine@ct.gov
/s/ Philip T. Newbury, Jr. ______________
Philip T. Newbury, Jr.
4
Related Content
in New Haven County
Preview
NO: (X06) UWY-CV21-5028294-S SUPERIOR COURT NANCY BURTON : COMPLEX LITIGATION DOCKET v. : AT WATERBURY DAVID PHILIP MASON, ET AL : NOVEMBER 5, 2021 OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO BIFURCATE HEARING ON DEFENDANTS’SPECIAL MOTION TO DISMISS The defendants, Elinore Carmody and Dennis Gibbons, pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-196a, hereby object to the plaintiff’s motion (#251.00)1 to bifurcate the hearing on their special motion to dismiss (#115.00 and #138.00). The obvious purpose of the plaintiff’s motion is to further delay the completion of the hearing on the defendants’ motion. The Anti-SLAPP statute provides that: “The court shall conduct an expedited hearing on a special motion to dismiss. The expedited hearing shall be held not later than sixty days after the date of filing of such special motion to dismiss, unless, (A) the court orders specified and limited discovery pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. . . .” (Emphasis added). Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-196a(e)(1). The court has 1 The plaintiff’s motion was filed on June 2, 2021. However, her proposed interrogatories and requests for production were not served on the defendants until July 5, 2021. See (#129.00). allowed Ms. Burton to conduct limited discovery as to the defendants’ complaints to governmental authorities concerning her abuse and neglect of her goats. The defendants responded to the discovery on September 17, 2021. They produced 35 e- mails to various governmental authorities, and 46 complaints to the Redding Police Department, complaining of Ms. Burton’s abuse and neglect of her goats. These documents unequivocally establish, as a matter of law, that this lawsuit is based on the defendants’ exercise of their right to petition the government on a matter of public concern in violation of § 52-196a. Kaufmann v. Synnott, 2021 WL 4295356 (Conn.Super. 2021); see also Baity v. Mickley-Gomez, 2020 WL 9314537 (Conn.Super. 2020). The court has scheduled the hearing on the defendants’ special motion to dismiss for November 8, 2021. The decision to bifurcate proceedings lies solely within the discretion of the trial court. Barry v. Quality Steel Products, Inc., 263 Conn. 424, 449, 820 A.2d 258 (2003). Bifurcation would serve no useful purpose in this case. The parties have fully briefed the issues as to both prongs of the analysis under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-196a. Hearing argument on both prongs will not prejudice the plaintiff in any way. However, bifurcating the hearing would prejudice the defendants in terms of additional time and expense, and in delaying the ruling on the motion. Wherefore, it is respectfully requested that the defendants’ objection to the plaintiff’s motion to bifurcate be sustained. 2 DEFENDANTS, ELINORE CARMODY AND DENNIS GIBBONS By_/s/ Philip T. Newbury, Jr. _________ Philip T. Newbury, Jr. Howd & Ludorf, LLC 65 Wethersfield Avenue Hartford, CT 06114-1121 (860) 249-1361 (860) 249-7665 (Fax) Juris No.: 28228 E-mail: pnewbury@hl-law.com 3 CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing Objection to Plaintiff’s Motion To Bifurcate Hearing On Defendant’s Special Motion To Dismiss was or will immediately be mailed or delivered electronically or non-electronically on November 5, 2021, to all parties and self-represented parties of record and that written consent for electronic delivery was received from all attorneys and self-represented parties receiving electronic delivery. Nancy Burton Robert S. Hillson, II, Esquire 154 Highland Avenue Rubin and Rudman, LLP Rowayton, CT 06853 53 State Street NancyBurtonCT@aol.com Boston, MA 02109 rhillson@rubinrudman.com James N. Tallberg, Esquire Steven J. Stafstrom, Jr., Esquire Karsten & Tallberg, LLC Pullman & Comley, LLC 500 Enterprise Drive, Suite 4B 850 Main Street, P.O. Box 7006 Rocky Hill, CT 06067 Bridgeport, CT 06601 jtallberg@kt-lawfirm.com sstafstrom@pullcom.com Jonathan E. Harding, Esquire Alexander W. Ahrens, Esquire Matthew I. Levine, Esquire Melick & Porter AG-Environment 900 Main Street South 165 Capitol Ave., 5th Floor Suite 102 Hartford, CT 06106 Southbury, CT 06488 Jonathan.harding@ct.gov aahrens@melicklaw.com matthew.levine@ct.gov /s/ Philip T. Newbury, Jr. ______________ Philip T. Newbury, Jr. 4