Judge Brings Gavel Down on New Haven Attorney, Referred to Statewide Grievance Committee
Superior Court Judge Susan Quinn Cobb referred Gretchen Randall, a principal at New Haven's Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, to the Connecticut Statewide Grievance Committee.
September 24, 2019 at 12:43 PM
4 minute read
In a stinging rebuke, a Superior Court judge announced Sept. 18 that she would refer Neubert, Pepe & Monteith principal Gretchen Randall to the Statewide Grievance Committee for providing inaccurate interrogatories to the plaintiff's counsel in a premises liability slip-and-fall case.
The judge also ordered a mistrial, and said a new trial with a new judge would be set for December to unravel why Randall hadn't mentioned a video recording of the incident at the center of the suit.
"Because the court believes that it has an obligation to do so, it is the court's intention to refer counsel to the grievance committee, something I have never done in my nine and a half years sitting on the bench," Hartford Superior Court Judge Susan Quinn Cobb said. "Doing this gives me no pleasure, but not doing anything is not an option as it sends the wrong message to counsel, to her firm, and to other counsel practicing in this state, that filling out interrogatory forms in this manner is not appropriate."
Randall, who specializes in medical malpractice and hospital liability defense and professional malpractice and insurance defense, referred all comment to Mike Neubert, the firm's managing partner. Neubert told the Connecticut Law Tribune Tuesday, "Because this matter is still in litigation, it's inappropriate to comment. But we are confident attorney Randall did not breach any of her professional obligations."
Plaintiff counsel Ed Gasser of Avon-based Gasser Law Firm declined to comment for this report.
Gasser had requested a motion for sanctions against Randall. He represents MaryAnn Prince, who is suing Eastern Connecticut Health Network Inc. and Prospect Manchester Hospital Inc., alleging she fell and suffered injuries from a broken section of a cement walkway.
At the crux of Cobb's decision are interrogatories plaintiff's counsel sent to Randall, who represented defendants, including ECHN.
According to the judge's timeline of events, the defendant's risk manager, Ann Donahue, certified under oath that the answers to the interrogatories were true and accurate. Randall signed the certification and informed the court in chambers that she had advised the defendants and Donahue as to the answers. But, the judge wrote, the answers were not accurate.
Two questions, specifically, the judge said, were not answered honestly. The first question asks whether any written report of the incident noted in the complaint was prepared by "you or your employees in the regular course of business." Donahue answered no when she should have answered yes, the judge said.
The second question reads: "Have you made any statements, as defined in the Connecticut Practice Book, section 13-1, to any person regarding any of the incidents in the complaint." Again Donahue answered no when she should have said yes, Cobb wrote.
At the center of the case is Reggie Davis, a hospital security officer, who knew the plaintiff's daughter. Davis met with the plaintiff and her daughter the day after the incident. He examined the area where Prince said she fell, and took information from both women concerning the incident.
Davis, the judge wrote, also wrote an email to his supervisor setting forth the details of the meeting with the two women and that the plaintiff had reported falling the day before. The judge said the email included all of the information that Davis would have included in a hospital incident report.
There was a video of the incident. That video no longer exists due to a changeover in the hospital's camera systems, according to the litigants, despite Davis taking steps to save the video so it would not be taped over.
The judge wrote that Randall, maintaining that Davis' email to the supervisor was not a statement, "apparently made the deliberate decision not to disclose the email. The court also believes that the defendant had a duty to disclose the existence of the video and that it had been destroyed inadvertently or not." Cobb also wrote that "the court has a duty to send a message that this sort of discovery practice is inappropriate."
The 10-page transcript shows that Cobb said with regard to discovery that Randall might have violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: 3.1, involving meritorious claims and contentions; 3.3, involving candor toward the tribunal; and 3.4, regarding fairness to opposing counsel and the commentaries to those rules.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMeet Phrances Szewczyk, a Family Law Attorney Running for Middletown Judge
3 minute readJudges Say Social Media and Political Polarization Puts Them in Danger
2 Lawyers Run for Fairfield Judgeship: Democrat Katherine Caulfield and Republican Daniel Ford
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and Pryor Cashman have entered appearances for Diageo Americas Supply d/b/a Ciroc Distilling Co. and Sony Songs, a division of Sony Music Publishing, respectively, in a pending lawsuit. The case was filed Sept. 10 in New York Southern District Court by the Bloom Firm and IP Legal Studio on behalf of Dawn Angelique Richard. The plaintiff, who performed as a member of producer Sean 'Diddy' Combs girl group Danity Kane and later his band, Diddy - Dirty Money, claims that she was financially exploited by Combs and subjected to inhumane working conditions. Among other violations, Richard claims that Combs required group members to remain at his residences and studios, deprived them of adequate food and sleep and forced them to rehearse for 36 to 48 hours without breaks. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, is 1:24-cv-06848, Richard v. Combs et al.
Who Got The Work
Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Kevin M. McGinty of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, as well as Jesse W. Belcher-Timme of Doherty, Wallace, Pillsbury & Murphy, have stepped in to defend Peter Pan Bus Lines in a pending consumer class action. The suit, filed Sept. 4 in Massachusetts District Court by Hackett Feinberg PC and KalielGold PLLC, accuses the defendant of charging undisclosed 'junk fees' on top of ticket prices during checkout. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni, is 3:24-cv-12277, Mulani et al v. Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250