Legal Opinion

Rosales v. Lupien

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided September 15, 1998No. AC 17476PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

O’CONNELL, C. J.

In this action for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from the judgment for the substitute defendant following a jury trial. The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly (1) excluded evidence that was admissible under the dead man’s statute and (2) ruled that the plaintiff could not ask the defendant administrator in the jury’s presence whether he was willing to waive the attorney-client privilege. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

*407The jury reasonably could have found the following facts. Beginning in December, 1993, the plaintiff, a nurse’s aide,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Doyle v. ReevesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
  2. Tuite v. Stop & Shop Companies, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1997
  3. Rowland v. Philadelphia, Wilmington & Baltimore RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
  4. Plisko v. MorganSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pender v. MatrangaConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
  2. Maltas v. MaltasDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2002
  3. McMunn v. Pirelli Tire, LLC.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2001
  4. Compone v. Temple Physical Therapy, No. Cv97-0402900s (Jan. 22, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002
  5. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. LondaginSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001

1 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