Simms v. Seaman
This text of 27 A.3d 373 (Simms v. Seaman) 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.
Opinion
Robert SIMMS
V,
Penny Q. SEAMAN et al.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
John R. Williams, New Haven, in support of the petition.
Raymond J. Plouffe, Jr., Shelton, Nadine M. Pare, Cheshire, Patrick M. Noonan, and Matthew H. Geelan, Guilford, in opposition.
The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 129 Conn.App. 651, 23 A.3d 1, is granted, limited to the following issue:
"Did the Appellate Court properly determine that claims of fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress brought against attorneys for conduct that occurred during judicial proceedings were barred as a matter of law by the doctrine of absolute immunity?"
NORCOTT and HARPER, Js., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 A.3d 373, 302 Conn. 915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simms-v-seaman-conn-2011.