As an attorney who has also been a respondent in a civil commitment proceeding, I have the unique perspective of sitting on both sides of the attorney-client relationship in which a client’s judgment and capacity is in question.
And so I was disappointed in the editorial, "Impaired Clients Suing Their Lawyers," published in the February 1, 2013 edition of the Law Tribune. The editorial was critical of the state Supreme Court’s decision in Gross v. Rell, 304 Conn. 234 (2012), which held that a lawyer for a conserved person has no immunity from suit by the conserved person. But in truth, this was a landmark decision for the rights of people with disabilities and it is a decision that good lawyers should welcome.
