Page 10 - CLT032221

10 ¦ MARCH 22, 2021 NEWS

¦ From LAWYERS on PAGE 9 important in these negotiations
a cap on damages and that’s two to allow citizens to be afforded the
times a person’s medical expenses opportunity to have their claims
and lost wages. heard in their own state court, as
And both casinos are immune The question remains opposed to tribal court.”
from disputes that occur on their Strafaci, an attorney for 30 years,
land, such as those involving a fi- on whether the tribes
nancial loss at a casino. will have immunity from echoed Harrington’s concerns.
“Online gaming and sports
The governor’s office says the disputes off Native
American land. betting have so many issues with

agreement will generate “tens of regard to the potential for liability
millions of dollars” in revenue for and having people financially in-
the Nutmeg State. jured. If something goes wrong in
There are several components to the tentative the process and someone is cheated and not paid,
agreement, parts of which the Legislature must sign they should have a legal right and remedy to be
off on. They include the casinos having a stake in 15 compensated. They shouldn’t be told there is noth-
retail sports betting locations in Connecticut; all are ing that can be done about it because the tribes have
off Indian land. In addition, the proposal calls for a sovereign immunity,” Strafaci said.
20% tax rate on new online gaming and a 13.75% tax David Bednarz, the governor’s spokesman, didn’t
rate on sports wagering, Lamont’s office said. respond to requests for comment.
“I’ve always felt that, to the extent the tribes are In addition, neither George Galinsky, senior vice
engaging in activities off the reservation and espe- president of marketing and communications for Mo-
cially activities of a pure commercial nature, like hegan Sun, or Lori Potter, public affairs director for
gambling, or any sort of business they are involved the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation, responded
in, then they should be subject to the same juris- to requests for comment Monday.
diction that every other business in the state of ¦

Connecticut is,” said Harrington of Polito & Har- Robert Storace covers legal trends, lawsuits and
rington in Waterford. “If they want to do things analysis for the Connecticut Law Tribune. Follow
on their reservation, they have a right to have the him on Twitter @RobertSCTLaw or reach him at
dispute heard in their own court system. But it’s 203-437-5950.

‘I Guess It Blew Up in My Face’:
1-Year Suspension for IOLTA Misuse

By Robert Storace

The Connecticut Appellate Court Friday sided his IOLTA account has been egregious. There was
with a Superior Court judge and let stand a clear commingling, and the reviewing committee
one-year suspension from the Connecticut notes that the respondent previously agreed not to
bar of a Wallingford civil rights attorney accused of use his IOLTA account to pay personal or business-
using money in his Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Ac- related expenses in a 2008 grievance complaint.”
counts, or IOLTA, for personal use. In Disciplinary Counsel v. Cannatelli, the Office of
The three-judge panel wrote: “The record in this Chief Disciplinary Counsel noted that Frank Can-
matter reflects that the respondent’s mishandling of natelli deposited $10,591 into the account on behalf

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune