Legal Opinion
Presnick v. Esposito
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided August 5, 1986No. 4221; 4399PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.
These two appeals present the common issue of whether the trial court may preclude an attorney from representing only himself in litigation before the court. In each case, the court entered an order effectively barring the attorney from doing so. We find error in each appeal.
In the first case, Daniel V. Presnick, who is an attorney, sued Ralph and Rita Esposito for legal fees for services which he rendered to them in another case. Presnick did not sign the summons, but he entered a *366pro se appearance and signed the complaint. The Espositos filed an answer, and also filed a counterclaim based…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Low v. Town of MadisonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. ColeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Erwin M. Jennings Co. v. DiGenovaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Willard v. Town of West HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
- Nanos v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- FRANKLIN CREDIT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v. GrayLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2009
- Esposito v. PresnickConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Brunswick v. Inland Wetlands CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Farrington v. Law Firm of SessionsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1997
- Brooks v. South Carolina Commission on Indigent DefenseCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2017
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.