Legal Opinion
Rhode v. Milla
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 15, 2008No. SC 17860PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
NORCOTT, J.
The principal issue in this appeal is whether a nonparty witness’ invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination pursuant to the fifth amendment to the United States constitution 1 constitutes admissible evidence in a civil case. The defendants, Roberto Milla and Rutila Enamorado, appeal 2 from the judgment of the trial court in a personal injury action rendered after a jury trial in favor of the plaintiff, Sharlynn Rhode. 3 On appeal, the defendants claim that the trial court improperly: (1) admitted into evidence bills from Richard Fogel, the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Edith Libutti, Doing Business as Lion Crest Stable, a Sole Proprietorship v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- State v. SkakelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- State v. SaucierSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Struckman v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Gordon v. Indusco Management Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Wiseman v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Klein v. Norwalk HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Milliun v. New Milford HospitalConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- Presidential Village, LLC v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
- DeMaria v. BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2021
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.