Albaitis v. Albaitis, No. Cv 95-125343 S (Sep. 21, 1995)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 10868
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided September 21, 1995·No. No. CV 95-125343 S·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION We have heard oral argument and reviewed the parties' excellent briefs. We conclude on this record that the defendant has failed to demonstrate clear grounds for us to exercise our legal discretion to order any party to be absent while another party is being deposed. The motion is denied. Anderson v. Snyder, 91 Conn. 407, 408-09 (1917); Helfferichv. Farley, 36 Conn. Sup. 333-34 (1980).

In view of a party's right to be present at a deposition and the Anderson court's admonition that an order of exclusion to a party be "sparingly exercised," we decline to speculate what might occur at the deposition; presume regularity; and are NOT persuaded by the somewhat contrary CT Page 10869 authority of Donahue v. Nurses Registry, Inc. 40 Conn. Sup. 196-97 (1984).

Murray, J. 13 October 1995

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Albaitis v. Albaitis, No. Cv 95-125343 S (Sep. 21, 1995), 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 10868 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 10868 (Albaitis v. Albaitis, No. Cv 95-125343 S (Sep. 21, 1995)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anderson v. Snyder
99 A. 1032 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1917)
Donaghue v. Nurses Registry, Inc.
485 A.2d 945 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1984)
Helfferich v. Farley
419 A.2d 913 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1980)