Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mosby v. Board of Education of City of Norwalk

Court of Appeals of Connecticut

July 16, 2019

JOHN MOSBY ET AL.
v.
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF NORWALK ET AL.

          Argued April 16, 2019

         Procedural History

         Action to recover damages for breach of contract, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Stamford-Norwalk, where the court, Lee, J., granted the motion to dismiss filed by the defendant Board of Education of the City of Norwalk; thereafter, the court, Jacobs, J., granted the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant United Public Service Employees Union; subsequently, the court, Jacobs, J., rendered judgment in favor of the defendants, from which the named plaintiff appealed to this court. Affirmed.

          John Mosby, self-represented, the appellant (named plaintiff).

          M. Jeffry Spahr, deputy corporation counsel, for the appellee (named defendant).

          John M. Walsh, Jr., for the appellee (defendant United Public Service Employees Union).

          Elgo, Bright and Beach, Js.

          OPINION

          BEACH, J.

         The self-represented plaintiff, John Mosby, [1] appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendants, the Board of Education of the City of Norwalk (board), and United Public Services Employees Union (union), following the granting of the board's motion to dismiss and the union's motion for summary judgment. On appeal, Mosby claims that the court erred in (1) granting the motion to dismiss in favor of the board on the ground of improper service of process, and (2) granting the motion for summary judgment in favor of the union on the ground that Mosby lacked standing to commence this action against the union. We affirm the judgment of the court.

         The trial court's memorandum of decision granting the union's motion for summary judgment sets forth the following relevant and undisputed facts. ‘‘As custodians employed by the [board], the plaintiffs were members of Local 1042 Council #4, which negotiated Collective Bargaining Agreements with the [board] in 1997, 2003, and 2011. At the time of [Mosby's] retirement on November 5, 1999, he received medical benefits as set forth in . . . the 1997 Agreement. . . .

         ‘‘Five of the plaintiffs, who all retired between February 9, 2009, and June 30, 2011, received retirement benefits pursuant to the 2003 Agreement . . . . One of the plaintiffs, who retired on June 30, 2012, received retirement benefits pursuant to the 2011 Agreement. All of the plaintiffs are currently receiving the coverage and benefits to which they are entitled pursuant to the Agreements which were in effect on the dates of their retirements.

         ‘‘Local 1042 Council #4 was decertified by the Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations on August 26, 2015, and the defendant [union] was certified as the exclusive representative of all custodians employed by the board. The defendant [union] was not a party to the negotiations or the resulting Agreements in 1997, 2003, or 2011.''

         The plaintiffs' complaint alleged that the board and the union had breached a contract between them governing the plaintiffs' retirement health insurance benefits. On November 29, 2016, the board filed a motion to dismiss the action against it for improper service of process. The court granted the motion to dismiss on January 17, 2017.

         On August 9, 2017, the union filed a motion for summary judgment claiming that the plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue this claim. On August 21, 2017, Mosby filed an opposition to the union's motion for summary judgment. Following a hearing, the court granted the union's motion for summary judgment by memorandum of decision dated March 27, 2018, concluding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring this action and that the union could not have breached the agreement ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.