Sung v. Butterworth

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Sung v. Butterworth

653 A.2d 825, 231 Conn. 940, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 432

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 12, 1994·No. SC 15156·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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?”

Sung v. Butterworth, 653 A.2d 825, 231 Conn. 940, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 432 (Colo. 1994).

Pincite

653 A.2d 825 (Sung v. Butterworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related