Legal Opinion
Young v. Rutkin
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided September 9, 2003No. AC 23239PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WEST, J.
The plaintiff, Richard Young, appeals from the judgment of the trial court directing a verdict for *356the defendant, Arnold Rutkin, an attorney, in this legal malpractice action. The plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) held that his expert witnesses were not qualified to offer opinion evidence and (2) directed the verdict when the evidence was sufficient for submission to the jury even in the absence of expert testimony. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts are necessary to our resolution of the plaintiffs appeal. The defendant…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Davis v. MargolisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Fitzmaurice v. FlynnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Grayson v. Wofsey, Rosen, Kweskin & KurianskySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- State v. HenryConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Pearl v. NelsonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Rosato v. MascardoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- McCann Real Equities Series XXII, LLC v. David McDermott Chevrolet, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Glaser v. Pullman & Comley, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- St. Onge, Stewart, Johnson & Reens, LLC v. Media Group, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- Bagley v. Adel Wiggins GroupSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.