Weber v. Weber, No. Fa-90-0054535s (Feb. 18, 1994)
This text of 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 1685 (Weber v. Weber, No. Fa-90-0054535s (Feb. 18, 1994)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Section
The defendant's attorney represented her pro-bono, and is seeking an attorney's fee strictly for his own benefit, so the court's decision in this motion will have no effect on the defendant.
Since Attorney Renzullo's claim is based on legal services rendered during the pendency of the action and prior to its withdrawal, the court has continuing jurisdiction to determine this claim. The court has restored this case to the active docket by assigning the instant motion for a hearing, and by hearing it with both counsel and the parties present. See Matey v. Waterbury,
Conn. Gen. Stat.
The court will award an attorney's fee to the defendant's attorney, subject to the requirements of Conn. Gen. Stat.
RICHARD A. WALSH
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 1685, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weber-v-weber-no-fa-90-0054535s-feb-18-1994-connsuperct-1994.