Olson v. Accessory Controls & Equipment Corp.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Olson v. Accessory Controls & Equipment Corp.

740 A.2d 864, 251 Conn. 917, 1999 Conn. LEXIS 399, 1999 WL 1053283

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedNovember 2, 1999

DocketSC 16218

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 740 A.2d 864 (Olson v. Accessory Controls & Equipment Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Olson v. Accessory Controls & Equipment Corp., 740 A.2d 864, 251 Conn. 917, 1999 Conn. LEXIS 399, 1999 WL 1053283 (Colo. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 54 Conn. App. 506 (AC 18324), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“In the circumstances of this case, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court properly had determined that certain communications between [918]*918counsel for the named defendant and an expert consulting firm retained by the named defendant were covered by the attorney-client privilege?”

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16218. Michael N. LaVelle and Alan I. Scheer, in support of the petition. Glenn A. Duhl, Richard D. O’Connor, Edward F. O’Donnell and George J. Kelly, Jr., in opposition. Decided November 2, 1999

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, 54 Conn. App. 506 (AC 18324), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“In the circumstances of this case, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court properly had determined that certain communications between [918]*918counsel for the named defendant and an expert consulting firm retained by the named defendant were covered by the attorney-client privilege?”

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16218. Michael N. LaVelle and Alan I. Scheer, in support of the petition. Glenn A. Duhl, Richard D. O’Connor, Edward F. O’Donnell and George J. Kelly, Jr., in opposition. Decided November 2, 1999

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

740 A.2d 864, 251 Conn. 917, 1999 Conn. LEXIS 399, 1999 WL 1053283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olson-v-accessory-controls-equipment-corp-conn-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack