Legal Opinion

Dubreuil v. Witt

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided December 9, 2003No. AC 23915PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*412 Opinion

DRANGINIS, J.

In this legal malpractice action, we must determine whether following a trial to the court in which the plaintiffs failed to introduce expert testimony as to the standard of care applicable to attorneys who practice before the Superior Court, the trial court properly concluded that the defendant, an attorney licensed to practice in this state, breached the applicable standard of care. We conclude that in this trial to the court, the judge did not need the benefit of expert testimony to determine the standard of care applicable to an attorney engaged in litigation practice…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Dunham v. DunhamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  2. Santopietro v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  3. Gagne v. VaccaroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
  4. Davis v. MargolisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  5. Bizzoco v. ChinitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Stohlts v. GilkinsonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
  2. Vanliner Insurance v. FayConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
  3. Grimm v. FoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2012
  4. Wallenta v. MoscowitzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
  5. Valentine v. WattersSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004

18 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