Lafferty v. Jones
Syllabus
The plaintiff in error, P, the attorney for J and several other defendants in the underlying consolidated actions, filed a writ of error challenging the order of the trial court suspending him from the practice of law for a period of six months. The plaintiffs in those actions, including certain family members of those killed in the mass shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, had filed suit against J and the other defendants as a result of J's use of his nationally syndicated radio program and Internet websites he owned to publish content proclaiming that the mass shooting was a staged event. During trial, the court issued a protective order concerning sensitive personal and confidential infor- mation about the plaintiffs that the defendants had obtained through the discovery process. The order limited use of the information to counsel of record and others involved in the preparation and litigation of the underlying actions. The plaintiffs' confidential information was released during the course of communications P had with attorneys in Texas, including R, about related actions pending there and the possible collabo- ration between P and R on the cases in both states. During that time period, L, a Texas attorney, filed a bankruptcy petition for several defen- dants in the Texas cases. L then contacted W, who was counsel prior to P for several of the defendants in the underlying Connecticut actions, and requested access to all of the discovery materials obtained in the Connection actions. W then emailed L and P, warning that L might not be authorized to access the confidential documents in light of the protective order. Later that day, L obtained copies of the protective order. P did not ask L to sign a confidentiality order, and L was not informed by P or anyone from P's law firm that the discovery materials he was being provided included the plaintiffs' confidential information. A, an attorney in P's law firm, then emailed L, asking him to give R
Judges: Bright; Moll; Prescott
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court· 1976-02-24· cited 16,859×
- State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-12-19· cited 2,736×
- Mayberry v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court· 1971-01-20· cited 732×
- State v. CanalesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-03-13· cited 82×
- Burton v. MottoleseSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-12-16· cited 74×
- Briggs v. McWeenySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2002-05-21· cited 61×
- Banks v. ThomasSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-07-15· cited 47×
- Notopoulos v. Statewide Grievance CommitteeSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2006-02-14· cited 43×
- Thode v. ThodeSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1983-07-19· cited 33×
- Brunswick v. Statewide Grievance CommitteeConnecticut Appellate Court· 2007-09-04· cited 31×
- Sousa v. SousaSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2017-09-27· cited 25×
- State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2006-02-28· cited 21×
- Sousa v. SousaConnecticut Appellate Court· 2017-06-13· cited 16×
- O'BRIEN v. Superior CourtConnecticut Appellate Court· 2008-02-12· cited 14×
- Henry v. Statewide Grievance CommitteeConnecticut Appellate Court· 2008-10-28· cited 10×
- Morton v. SyriacConnecticut Appellate Court· 2020-03-03· cited 7×
- State v. SumlerConnecticut Appellate Court· 2020-07-21· cited 5×
- Ambrose v. AmbroseConnecticut Appellate Court· 2024-02-06· cited 4×
- MacCalla v. American Medical Response of Connecticut, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court· 2019-03-05· cited 3×
- Fernandez v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court· 2019-10-22· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.