Appellate Court Notes: Week of July 11, 2016
Welcome to our Supreme and Appellate Court summaries webpage. On this page, I provide abbreviated summaries of decisions from the Connecticut Appellate Courts which highlight important issues and developments in Connecticut law, and provide practical practice pointers to litigants. I have been summarizing these court decisions internally for our firm for more than 10 years, and providing relevant highlights to my municipal and insurance practice clients for almost as long. It was suggested that a wider audience might appreciate brief summaries of recent rulings that condense often long and confusing decisions down to their basic elements. These summaries are limited to the civil litigation decisions. I may from time to time add commentary, and may even criticize a decision’s reasoning. Such commentary is solely my own personal opinion. Pullman & Comley’s Appellate Practice Group of which I am a member includes experienced appellate advocates in almost every area of the law. Should you have a need to consult about a potential appeal, please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I hope the reader finds these summaries helpful. – Edward P. McCreery
Posted July 11, 2016
Appellate Court Advance Release Opinions:
- AC37257 - Computer Reporting Services, LLC v. Lovejoy & Associates, LLC
A law firm faxed copies of three notices of deposition to the court reporter. The court reporter then attended the depositions and provided transcripts to the law firm, and the firm used the transcripts. As a result, a decision held that the law firm had entered into an implied contract to pay for those services. The law firm could not pawn off the responsibility to pay the $3,000 in bills to their client without disclosing its intent not to be liable for the bill and have the reported to agree to that restriction.
Next, the decision held that as a result of the law firm transferring the reporter’s collection action from the Small Claims Court to the Superior Court, the reporter was entitled to add $13,000 in legal bills.
Finally, the decision held that the law firm was a single member LLC and the Superior Court incorrectly held the lawyer personally liable. Only the LLC was liable for the reporter’s bills. There was no evidence the attorney was acting in his individual capacity. He signed everything after his LLC’s name.
The facts and holdings of any case may be redacted, paraphrased or condensed for ease of reading. No summary can be an exact rendering of any decision, however, so interested readers are referred to the full decisions. The docket number of each case is a hyperlink to the Connecticut Judicial Department online slip opinion. © 2016 Pullman & Comley, LLC. All Rights Reserved.Back to Top