DiStefano v. Milardo

Supreme Court of Connecticut

DiStefano v. Milardo

853 A.2d 524, 270 Conn. 908, 2004 Conn. LEXIS 315

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided June 30, 2004·No. SC 17221·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 82 Conn. App. 838 (AC 23368), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court properly had instructed the jury that no attorney-client relationship existed between the named defendant, Joseph E. Milardo, Jr., and Lawrence J. DiStefano?”

*909 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17221. Decided June 30, 2004 Lawrence S. Dressier, in support of the petition. Michael C. Conroy, in opposition.

VERTEFEUILLE, J.,

did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

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

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 82 Conn. App. 838 (AC 23368), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court properly had instructed the jury that no attorney-client relationship existed between the named defendant, Joseph E. Milardo, Jr., and Lawrence J. DiStefano?”

*909 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17221. Decided June 30, 2004 Lawrence S. Dressier, in support of the petition. Michael C. Conroy, in opposition.

VERTEFEUILLE, J.,

did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

DiStefano v. Milardo, 853 A.2d 524, 270 Conn. 908, 2004 Conn. LEXIS 315 (Colo. 2004).

Pincite

853 A.2d 524 (DiStefano v. Milardo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related