Legal Opinion
Piteo v. Gottier
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided February 3, 2009No. AC 29344PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McLACHLAN, J.
The sole question in this appeal is whether the trial court properly concluded that there was no tolling of the statute of limitations applicable to tort claims because of the continuous representation of a client by an investment advisor. We conclude that the court properly refused to extend the continuous representation rule to such a relationship. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts and procedural history are relevant to the resolution of the plaintiffs appeal. The plaintiff, Michael J. Piteo, brought this action against the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Rosato v. MascardoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
- Bank of Hartford County v. WatermanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
- Deleo v. NusbaumSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Grey v. Stamford Health System, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Haggerty v. WilliamsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. BioHealth Labs., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2021
- Flannery v. Singer Asset Finance Co., LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- Geiger v. CareyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
- INTERNATIONAL STRATEGIES GROUP, LTD. v. NessCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- Targonski v. ClebowiczConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.