Shew v. Freedom of Information Commission

696 A.2d 340, 241 Conn. 914, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 206
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided June 5, 1997·No. SC 15707·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The named defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 44 Conn. App. 611 (AC 15279), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the communications by town employees to Attorney Stuhlman were covered by the attorney-client privilege, subject to the factual determinations required by Upjohn v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 101 S. Ct. 677, 66 L. Ed. 2d 584 (1981)?

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the documents in question were preliminary drafts or notes within the meaning of General Statutes § 1-19 (b) (1)?”

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

Shew v. Freedom of Information Commission, 696 A.2d 340, 241 Conn. 914, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 206 (Colo. 1997).

696 A.2d 340 (Shew v. Freedom of Information Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Shew v. Freedom of Information Commission
714 A.2d 664 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1998)