Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Simms v. Seaman

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided June 28, 2011No. AC 31809Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBishop, J.

Attorneys take an oath to “do nothing dishonest . . . not knowingly allow anything dishonest to be done in court, and . . . inform the court of any dishonesty of which [they] have knowledge . . . .” General Statutes § 1-25. Because I cannot agree with the majority that lawyers should be absolutely immune, as a matter of law, from claims sounding in fraud, I respectfully dissent from that part of the majority opinion which affirms the judgment in favor of the defendants Penny Q. Seaman, Susan A. Moch, Kenneth J. Bartschi, Brendon P. Levesque *675and Karen L. Dowd on the fraud claims alleged by the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mozzochi v. BeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  2. Taylor v. McNicholsIdaho Supreme Court · 2010
  3. State v. DavisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  4. Fraidin v. WeitzmanCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  5. Stuart v. StuartSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API