Page 29 - CLT070620

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS JULY 6, 2020 ¦ 29

he engaged in. The court held that the ap- CONTRACTS
plicable statute requires officers to exercise
judgment in determining whether to pursue a Court Reversed In Part Judgment Based On
motorist, and therefore the statute imposes a Attorney Trial Referee’s Recommendation
discretionary rather than ministerial duty on In Breach Of Contract Case
police officers to drive with due regard for the
safety of others.
CASE: Sclafani Prop., Inc. v. Sport-n-life Distrib., LLC
COURT: Connecticut Appellate Court
APPELLATE COURT DOC. NO.: AC 40066
COURT OPINION BY: Bishop
DATE: June 23, 2020 • PAGES: 9
The parties entered into a commercial lease agree-
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ment and plaintiff sued defendant for breach of con-

Court Reversed Habeas Court’s tract, alleging defendant failed to make payments
as required. An attorney trial referee recommended
Judgment, Finding Petitioner’s Due judgment in favor of plaintiff, noting that plaintiff en-
Process Rights Had Been Violated tered exhibits into evidence and introduced testimony
that the defendants had failed to make certain rental
payments, pay real estate taxes, and hazard insurance
CASE: Anderson v. Comm’r of Corr. premiums. However, the referee also concluded that
COURT: Connecticut Appellate Court plaintiff did not produce evidence about the real es-
DOC. NO.: AC 41434
COURT OPINION BY: Devlin tate taxes or insurance premiums. Plaintiff objected
DATE: June 23, 2020 • PAGES: 11 to the referee’s report but the trial court denied it, and
Petitioner had been convicted of second-degree entered judgment in favor of plaintiff in line with the
assault and second-degree reckless endanger- referee’s report. Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney
ment. He was an insanity acquittee who had fees, which the court granted but not in the amount
been confined to a state psychiatric hospital at the plaintiff requested. Plaintiff appealed and the
the time of his crimes. At his sentencing, the court reversed in part. The court first held that the
trial court remanded him to the respondent’s trial court improperly accepted the referee’s findings
custody. Petitioner sought a writ of habeas of fact with respect to the unpaid real estate taxes. It
corpus, arguing that he was illegally confined noted that the record reflected both testimonial and
because he was not receiving adequate mental documentary evidence that supported plaintiff’s argu-
health treatment. After filing his habeas peti- ment that defendants owed real estate taxes. Plaintiffs
tion, plaintiff filed an emergency motion for had introduced into evidence an exhibit that provided
an expedited hearing. After the hearing, the an itemized list of outstanding amounts, including
court denied the habeas petition. Petitioner the real estate taxes, and defendant did not dispute the
then filed a motion for reconsideration, argu- amount but rather acknowledged it at trial. The court
ing that his rights to procedural due process also held that the trial court erroneously determined
had been violated because he had thought the its award of attorney fees on the basis of the amount
hearing was only to discuss the emergency mo- in damages awarded to plaintiff. The court stated that
tion, and he had no notice that his habeas peti- it is improper to use the amount in controversy to
tion would also be decided. The lower court determine a reasonable amount of attorney fees.
affirmed the habeas denial. The court reversed.
The court held that the ambiguities in the ha-
beas proceeding should be interpreted in favor CRIMINAL APPEALS

of the petitioner as he reasonably believed that Court Affirmed Convictions, Finding
he was proceeding solely on his emergency mo-
tion. The court noted that this belief was rea- Sufficient Evidence To Support
sonable because the conversation between the Defendant’s Confession
court and the attorneys contributed to the am-
biguity, the hearing was only scheduled for half CASE: State of Connecticut v. Robert H.
a day, and the lower court repeatedly indicated COURT: Connecticut Appellate Court
that the matter they were addressing was only DOC. NO.: AC 37544
the emergency motion. Therefore, the court COURT OPINION BY: Lavine
reversed and remanded. DATE: June 23, 2020 • PAGES: 12

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune