Hoyt v. Second Taxing District
In Hoyt v. Second Taxing District, 183 Conn. 508, 439 A.2d 428 (1981), the Court denied the plaintiff a cause of action against her decedent's employer.
The court rejected the plaintiff's arguments made under 31-293 and 31-293a advocating circumvention of the obstacle set forth in 31-284 (a).
In Hoyt, the first assertion of the plaintiff essentially mirrored the plaintiff's argument in Velardi, claiming that the employer was a "fellow employee" within the meaning of 31-293a because the employer was operating the power shovel that allegedly injured the plaintiff's decedent at the time of the accident. Id., 509.
In her second assertion, the plaintiff maintained that the defendant should be liable as the owner of the vehicle that caused the decedent's injuries. In Hoyt, the plaintiff also relied on the language of 31-293, which authorizes "an employer who has been named as a party defendant in an action brought by an employee against a third party 'to join as a party plaintiff in such action.'" Id., 510.
Ultimately, the Court refused to "conclude from the mere provision for realignment of parties under certain circumstances that the legislature intended to contradict what it had clearly and unambiguously stated in 31-284." Id., 511.