"In the name of judicial neutrality, the majority endorses an adjudicatory framework that, in operation, inevitably will result in self-represented parties losing their cases at the earliest stages of litigation simply because they do not know and cannot hope to learn the arcane peculiarities of our rules of practice," the dissent said.
August 30, 2024 at 05:49 PM
4 minute read
Litigation Reporter
Two Connecticut Supreme Court justices were critical of a recent majority decision, opining that it strayed from long-held protections for self-represented parties.
The underlying case was brought by Ammar Idlibi, a dentist who claimed the Hartford Courant Co. published two allegedly defamatory articles that “exaggerated” the significance and severity of disciplinary hearings resulting in reprimand, fines and probation of his dental license. The plaintiff is a self-represented party.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New England Legal Awards serves as a testament to the outstanding contributions and achievements made by legal professionals.
Consulting Magazine identifies the best firms to work for in the consulting profession.
Join General Counsel and Senior Legal Leaders at the Premier Forum Designed For and by General Counsel from Fortune 1000 Companies
Maggs, McDermott & DiCicco is seeking an associate with approximately 5 years of worker s compensation experience who is committed to ex...
The Council on Foreign Relations is seeking applicants for its six 2025-26 International Affairs Fellowship programs. These transformational...
(ASSOCIATE) PROFESSOR OF PRACTICE OFFICE FOR ACADEMIC SKILLS INSTRUCTION AND SUPPORT University of California College of the Law, San ...
Connecticut Supreme Court building. Photo: Wikicommons
