Sung v. Butterworth
653 A.2d 825, 231 Conn. 940, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 432
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedDecember 12, 1994
DocketSC 15156
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases
This text of 653 A.2d 825 (Sung v. Butterworth) 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
Sung v. Butterworth, 653 A.2d 825, 231 Conn. 940, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 432 (Colo. 1994).
Opinion
The named plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 35 Conn. App. 154 (AC 12102), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Whether the issue was incorrectly framed by the Appellate Court as the failure of the [named] plaintiff to furnish the required notice pursuant to Practice Book § 220 (D) when the issue was whether, under the circumstances of this case, a treating physician can be compelled to furnish expert testimony on the standard of care?”
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Sung v. Butterworth
665 A.2d 893 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1995)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
653 A.2d 825, 231 Conn. 940, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sung-v-butterworth-conn-1994.