Legal Opinion
Deleo v. Nusbaum
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided May 20, 2003No. SC 16750PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SULLIVAN, C. J.
The primary issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly concluded that the continuous representation rule did not apply in the plaintiffs legal malpractice action so as to toll General Statutes § 52-577, the statute of limitations applicable to tort actions. We conclude that the trial court improperly concluded that the action is barred by § 52-577. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts and procedural history are necessary to our disposition of this appeal. The plaintiff, David DeLeo, brought this action against the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Frederick Road Ltd. Partnership v. SturmCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
- Greene v. GreeneNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Ecker v. Town of West HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Omni-Food & Fashion, Inc. v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Gagne v. VaccaroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Poole v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Rosato v. MascardoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- Bellemare v. Wachovia Mortgage Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Neuhaus v. DeCholnokySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Alexandru v. StrongConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.