Connecticut: court-appointed probate lawyers seek immunity

by Walter Olson on October 25, 2011

The Connecticut Supreme Court is being asked to rule that lawyers and conservators appointed by probate judges are immune from being sued by those they represent. The case arose “because of the abuse that Daniel Gross, an elderly New York man, suffered during 2005 and 2006 at the hands of a Waterbury probate court after he became sick while visiting his daughter.” Gross was placed in a nursing home on conservator’s orders, a decision eventually reversed by a court. [Rick Green, Hartford Courant]

{ 1 comment }

1 Thufir_Hawat 10.25.11 at 11:55 am

From the article: “Richard Roberts, a lawyer for Donovan, argued that a conservator ‘is but an agent of the court,” merely carrying out the court’s wishes. ‘You shouldn’t have to look over your shoulder when you are making these judgment calls.’”

Appointed by the Court, not an agent for the Court. And the Court does not have the attorney-client relationship and is not paying fees (here, for both sides). Conservators (whatever that means), ad litems, trustees, and, my own bête noir, receivers, would probably do well to use some common sense, apply some perspective, and, yes, look over their shoulders (and in so doing, look up from the trough).

Comments on this entry are closed.