Associates Finan. Svcs. v. Barksdale, No. Cv910444030 (Nov. 26, 1991)

Connecticut Superior Court

Associates Finan. Svcs. v. Barksdale, No. Cv910444030 (Nov. 26, 1991)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 9965, 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 107

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedNovember 26, 1991

DocketNo. CV910444030

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 9965 (Associates Finan. Svcs. v. Barksdale, No. Cv910444030 (Nov. 26, 1991)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Associates Finan. Svcs. v. Barksdale, No. Cv910444030 (Nov. 26, 1991), 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 9965, 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 107 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: APPEARANCE OF AN EXECUTOR The executor of the estate in this matter has appeared pro se as a representative of the estate. An appearance in such a court proceeding would necessarily constitute the practice of law. See State Bar Assn. v. Connecticut Bank and Trust Co., 145 Conn. 222, 236-37 (1958) appeal after remand146 Conn. 556, 559-64 (1959). An individual involved in a court proceeding may not appear pro se for a corporation or other entity. Ero v. M M Enterprises, 39 Conn. Sup. 294, 295 (1984).

"An important aspect if an executor's fiduciary responsibility is the duty to maintain an undivided loyalty to the estate." Ramsdell v. Union Trust Co., 202 Conn. 57, 65 (1987). The role of an administrator of an estate is to protect the estate for the benefit of all those interested in it. Kleinman v. Marshall, 192 Conn. 479, 483 (1984). Thus, an executor of an estate represents the estate rather than his own personal interests. Id. Since one who represents the interests of another cannot appear pro se, the executor of the estate cannot appear pro se in this action. See Ero,39 Conn. Sup. at 295.

By the court.

CHARLES D. GILL JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT. CT Page 9966

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: APPEARANCE OF AN EXECUTOR The executor of the estate in this matter has appeared pro se as a representative of the estate. An appearance in such a court proceeding would necessarily constitute the practice of law. See State Bar Assn. v. Connecticut Bank and Trust Co., 145 Conn. 222, 236-37 (1958) appeal after remand146 Conn. 556, 559-64 (1959). An individual involved in a court proceeding may not appear pro se for a corporation or other entity. Ero v. M M Enterprises, 39 Conn. Sup. 294, 295 (1984).

"An important aspect if an executor's fiduciary responsibility is the duty to maintain an undivided loyalty to the estate." Ramsdell v. Union Trust Co., 202 Conn. 57, 65 (1987). The role of an administrator of an estate is to protect the estate for the benefit of all those interested in it. Kleinman v. Marshall, 192 Conn. 479, 483 (1984). Thus, an executor of an estate represents the estate rather than his own personal interests. Id. Since one who represents the interests of another cannot appear pro se, the executor of the estate cannot appear pro se in this action. See Ero,39 Conn. Sup. at 295.

By the court.

CHARLES D. GILL JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT. CT Page 9966

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 9965, 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/associates-finan-svcs-v-barksdale-no-cv910444030-nov-26-1991-connsuperct-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack