Legal Opinion · Dissent

Stuart v. Freiberg

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided May 21, 2013No. AC 33813Published

1DissentDiPENTIMA, C. J.

In large part, I agree with the well reasoned opinion of the majority. The majority concludes, however, that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to the reliance by the plaintiffs, William A. Stuart and Jonathan Stuart, on the defendant, Richard Freiberg, because “contrary to the [trial] court’s conclusion, the plaintiffs did not seek to have [their brother, Kenneth J. Stuart, Jr. (Stuart, Jr.)] removed as executor or as trustee of [the] estate [of their late father, Kenneth J. Stuart, Sr. (Stuart, Sr.)] in *711the 1993 litigation [between the Stuart brothers and others]. Rather, they…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stuart v. StuartSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
  2. Great Country Bank v. PastoreSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  3. Opoku v. GrantConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  4. Stuart v. StuartConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
  5. Coppola Construction Company, Inc. v. Hoffman Enterprises Limited PartnershipSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2012

3 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