DocketNumber: No. CV-0446200 S
Citation Numbers: 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 10220, 32 Conn. L. Rptr. 717
Judges: GRUENDEL, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 8/13/2002
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Mr. Meyers is a tax attorney in New York and is the father of the above named plaintiffs. While there is no claim that he has a previous attorney-client relationship with these plaintiffs, it is claimed that he is familiar with the partnership which is the subject of this litigation.
"A litigant's request to be represented by counsel of his choice, when freely made, should be respected by the court, unless some legitimate state interest is thwarted by admission of the out-of state attorney."Enquire Printing Publishing Co. v. O'Reilly,
The court has previously found that the defendant cannot stand to be in the same room as Mr. Meyers. Memorandum of Decision, July 3, 2001, p. 2 (Pittman, J.). That does not implicate a state interest, particularly where the rights of the litigants seeking representation a required to be considered rather than the personal tastes of those resisting it. Otherwise, the court is not aware of any state interest which would be implicated in a determination of whether Mr. Meyers is to be admitted. The dictates of the Supreme Court in Enquire Printing mandate his admission.
The Practice Book requires that the plaintiff's Connecticut counsel be present at all proceedings and assume full responsibility "for the conduct of the cause and of the attorney to whom such privilege is accorded." Practice Book, Section
The Motion for Admission is granted.
BY THE COURT,
GRUENDEL, J. CT Page 10222