Daniel REALE et al.
STATE of Rhode Island et al.
May 23, 2019
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Superior Court, Judicial District of Windham at Putnam,
Reale, self-represented, the appellant (named plaintiff).
W. Field, assistant attorney general for the state of Rhode
Island, with whom, on the brief, was Peter F. Neronha,
attorney general for the state of Rhode Island, for the
appellee (named defendant).
M. Richard, for the appellee (defendant town of Coventry).
Elgo and Harper, Js.
Conn.App. 760] In this spoliation of evidence action, the
plaintiff Daniel Reale appeals from the judgment of dismissal
rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendant town of
Coventry, Rhode Island (town), and the state defendants, the
state of Rhode Island; the Rhode Island Department of
Children, Youth, and Families; Investigator Harry Lonergan;
and Attorneys Brenda Baum and Diane Leyden, on the ground of
a lack of personal jurisdiction. On appeal, the plaintiff
claims [192 Conn.App. 761] that the court erred in (1)
determining that the state defendants did not waive their
right to seek dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction by
concurrently moving to strike the plaintiffs complaint as an
alternative to dismissal, and (2) granting the state
defendants motions to dismiss on the ground of a lack of
personal jurisdiction. We affirm the judgment of the court.
following facts, as set forth in the trial courts memoranda
of decision and procedural history are relevant to our
resolution of this appeal. "The plaintiff is a
Connecticut resident and father of two children who has joint
custody with his ex-wife, who, during the pertinent time, was
a resident of Rhode Island. In June, 2016, two neglect
petitions were commenced against the plaintiff by the Rhode
Island Department of Children, Youth, and Families arising
from an allegation by a school psychologist employed by the
town ... that the plaintiffs son suffered a gunshot wound
...." "That incident was investigated by the
Coventry, Rhode Island, Police Department, which determined
that no crime, abuse or neglect had occurred."
Thereafter, the "neglect petitions terminated in favor
of [the plaintiff] and his ex-wife in August, 2016, and
September, 2016, respectively." "The plaintiff
subsequently joined a civil action against the town, inter
alia, in the United States District Court for the District of
Rhode Island ...." In the federal action, ...