Heussner v. Day, Berry & Howard, LLP

899 A.2d 38, 278 Conn. 912, 2006 Conn. LEXIS 195

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided May 16, 2006·Published

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 94 Conn. App. 569 (AC 26461), is denied.

BORDEN and PALMER, Js., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

*913 John R. Williams, in support of the petition. Anthony M. Fitzgerald and David S. Hardy, in opposition. Decided May 16, 2006

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, 94 Conn. App. 569 (AC 26461), is denied.

BORDEN and PALMER, Js., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

*913 John R. Williams, in support of the petition. Anthony M. Fitzgerald and David S. Hardy, in opposition. Decided May 16, 2006

Heussner v. Day, Berry & Howard, LLP, 899 A.2d 38, 278 Conn. 912, 2006 Conn. LEXIS 195 (Colo. 2006).

Pincite

899 A.2d 38 (Heussner v. Day, Berry & Howard, LLP) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.