Legal Opinion
Honan v. Dimyan
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 12, 2001No. AC 20340PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*703 Opinion
DRANGINIS, J.
The plaintiffs appeal from the judgment of the trial court granting the defendants’ bill of costs. On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the court abused its discretion because it (1) failed to disqualify itself, and (2) awarded costs for subpoenas that were not shown to have been served and from which no testimony resulted. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
This appeal arises from a long-standing and contentious dispute between the plaintiffs, William H. Honan and his three children,1 and the defendants, attorney Joseph Dimyan and his law firm, Coury and Dimyan.2…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. SalmonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. ChowdhurySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Tarzia v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1999
- Legassey v. ShulanskyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Tirozzi v. Shelby InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Lighthouse Landings, Inc. v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
- State v. OsuchConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- TDS Painting & Restoration, Inc. v. Copper Beech Farm, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Bailey v. StateConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- Doyle v. Town of LitchfieldDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.