About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [i] (Spring 2026)

handle is hein.ali/rtotelwtd0007 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2026 Citations TORTS 3D: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS (DRAFTS) LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL HARM CHAPTER 8. LIABILITY FOR EMOTIONAL HARM § 48 A. Loss of Spousal Consortium Conn.2025. Com. (g) cit. in ftn. (citing com. (g) of T.D. No. 1, 2022). After infant child was severely injured when the car seat she was strapped into was placed next to an electric stove and caught fire, child's parents filed claims for, among other things, loss of filial consortium against manufacturer and retailer of the car seat and stove in federal court, alleging that the fire was caused by the faulty design or production of both the car seat and stove. Answering a question certified by the federal court, this court held that Connecticut did not recognize a parent's claim for loss of filial consortium in a child who suffered severe, but nonfatal, injuries because of a defendant's tortious conduct. The dissent cited Restatement Third of Torts: Concluding Provisions § 48 A, Comment g, in arguing that numerous jurisdictions allowed for statutory or common-law causes of action for loss of filial consortium. L.L. v. Newell Brands, Inc., 330 A.3d 53, 70. § 48 B. Loss of Child Consortium Conn.2025. Com. (b) cit. but not. fol. and cit. in diss. op., Rptr's Note to com. (b) quot. in diss. op. (T.D. No. 1, 2022). After infant child was severely injured when the car seat she was strapped into was placed next to an electric stove and caught fire, child's parents filed claims for, among other things, loss of filial consortium against manufacturer and retailer of the car seat and stove in federal court, alleging that the fire was caused by the faulty design or production of both the car seat and stove. Answering a question certified by the federal court, this court held that Connecticut did not recognize a parent's claim for loss of filial consortium in a child who suffered severe, but nonfatal, injuries because of a defendant's tortious conduct. The dissent cited Restatement Third of Torts: Concluding Provisions § 48 B, which recognized a cause of action for loss of filial consortium, in arguing that the trend was towards recognition of such claims. L.L. v. Newell Brands, Inc., 330 A.3d 53, 59, 70. COPYRIGHT C2026 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.