DocketNumber: No. CV98-0147607S
Citation Numbers: 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 1482, 23 Conn. L. Rptr. 42
Judges: WEST, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 2/5/1999
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/17/2021
At hearing and in his Memorandum In Support of Motion ForTemporary Injunction, plaintiff clearly indicates that he makes no complaint that the files, although technically owned by the firm up to the time of defendant's departure, followed defendant. However, he does claim a financial interest in the fees generated by those files and towards that end requests that the court restrain defendant's use of same by ordering that all or a substantial portion be escrowed until a judicial determination is made as to plaintiff's interest in same. In addition, plaintiff seeks to have defendant enjoined from soliciting any of plaintiff's clients that defendant did not service during his association with the firm. CT Page 1483
While the latter request seems reasonable under the circumstances, upon further review it is clear that defendant left plaintiff's law firm more than nine months ago and there is no evidence that during that period, defendant ever solicited, attempted to solicit or intended to solicit any of plaintiff's clients that he did not service during his association with the firm. As a result of the foregoing, it is evident that the requested extraordinary remedy is not warranted by the facts or circumstances presented to the court.
With regard to plaintiff's request that the court order certain fees escrowed, it is clear that such request is not supported by a showing of irreparable harm. Stocker v. City ofWaterbury,
While the court will not issue the requested temporary injunction, it is aware from the facts presented at hearing that in all probability plaintiff will succeed in his claim as to some portion of the fee generated in many if not all, of the files that were taken by the defendant during his departure.
Motion denied.
_________________ WEST, J.