Grievance Committee v. Goldfarb
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtSpallone, J.
The plaintiff grievance committee is appealing from the judgment of the trial court finding that the plaintiff had failed to prove that the defendant had violated certain sections of the Code of Professional Responsibility while acting as conservator of the person and the estate of Ethel Donaghue. The plain*466tiff initiated the proceedings below by presentment of the defendant, an attorney, pursuant to Practice Book § 31.1 The sole issue presented to us on appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying the plaintiffs motion to amend its complaint. The trial court denied the motion to amend…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Heslin v. Connecticut Law Clinic of Trantolo & TrantoloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- In Re DurantSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- STATE BAR ASSN. v. Connecticut Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
- State v. PeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Burton v. MottoleseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- In re PresnickConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
- Statewide Grievance Committee v. PresnickConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
- Marcus v. DuPerryConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Bannon v. WiseConnecticut Superior Court · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.