Legal Opinion
Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 15, 2005No. SC 17029PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PALMER, J.
At common law, statements made in connection with judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings are absolutely privileged. The principal issue raised by this certified appeal is whether General Statutes §§ 19a-17b (b) 1 and 19a-20, 2 which provide qualified immunity to persons who give information to the medical examining board (board) of the department of public health, abrogate the common-law privilege applicable to quasi-judicial proceedings of the board. The plaintiff, Mohinder P. Chadha, commenced this action alleging, inter alia, that the named defendant, Charlotte Hungerford…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Petyan v. EllisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- State v. CurcioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Memorial Hospital for McHenry County v. The Honorable Milton I. Shadur, United States District JudgeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- Miller v. EganSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Reagan v. Guardian Life InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1942
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Considine v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Hopkins v. O'CONNORSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Rioux v. BarrySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Gallo v. BarileSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Turner v. BoyleDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2015
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.