New Haven Lawyer Apologizes, But Opposing Counsel Wants Sanctions
Gretchen Randall, an attorney with New Haven's Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, has apologized to the court in a letter to the judge who announced she would be referring her to the Statewide Grievance Committee.
September 30, 2019 at 12:36 PM
4 minute read
A New Haven attorney who raised the ire of a Superior Court judge, who referred her to the Statewide Grievance Committee, has responded in writing, saying any mistakes she made in not disclosing discovery information to the plaintiff wasn't intentional.
But opposing counsel called the letter inappropriate, and asked the court to disregard it.
That two-page apology letter came from Neubert, Pepe & Monteith attorney Gretchen Randall. It is addressed to plaintiff attorney Ed Gasser and Hartford Superior Court Judge Susan Quinn Cobb, who referred Randall to disciplinary authorities for providing inaccurate interrogatories to plaintiff counsel in a premises liability slip-and-fall case.
"I begin with an apology to the court and to counsel for my neglect in not disclosing the email message in my client's responses to plaintiff's discovery requests," Randal wrote. "I failed to consider whether the email message was a report or statement subject to disclosure. I now realize that my review of the available records was not complete. While I readily acknowledge that I made a mistake, I also wish to stress that I did not intentionally withhold material I believed was subject to disclosure."
But opposing counsel filed an objection the following day to Randall's correspondence.
In it, Gasser called Randall's letter and explanation of events "wholly inappropriate particularly when the court, honorable Judge Cobb, has recused itself from the matter." Gasser also wrote that Randall's letter "furthers the position that the conduct of counsel was a 'mistake,' as opposed to the conscious decision to conceal the content of the reporting."
|Click here to read Gasser's objection, beginning on page 1, and Randall's letter, from page 4.
The filings followed the judge's Sept. 18 rebuke of Randall, during which the judge also ordered a mistrial, and said she had an "obligation" to refer the defense attorney to the grievance committee.
"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 the state, that filling out interrogatory forms in this manner is not appropriate," the judge wrote.
Randall specializes in medical malpractice, hospital liability, professional malpractice and insurance defense. She represented defendants Eastern Connecticut Health Network Inc. and Prospect Manchester Hospital Inc. in a suit by MaryAnn Price, who alleges she fell and suffered injuries on a broken section of a cement walkway.
Both Gasser and the judge asked why Randall never mentioned the existence of a video of the fall in her discovery papers to the plaintiff. That video no longer exists due to a changeover in the hospital's camera systems. But the court said Randall had a duty to disclose the video's existence.
Gasser requested sanctions.
In the letter that followed the judge's disciplinary referral, Randall wrote, "Again, I apologize to the court and to counsel for the late disclosure, and I assure the court that I will not forget the lesson I have learned in recognizing my mistake."
After opposing counsel objected to the letter, Randall's managing partner Mike Neubert filed a response in court.
"Attorney Randall's sole purpose in communicating with the court and plaintiff's counsel by letter was to extend her apologies for the late production of the information at issue, and to advise the court and plaintiff's counsel of certain measures she and her firm are willing to undertake in order to address any remaining concerns plaintiff may have about the completeness of disclosure in this action," Neubert wrote.
Randall referred all comment Monday to Neubert, who said, "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."
Gasser declined to comment.
Read more:
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 AllDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
Trending Stories
- 1'Fulfilled Her Purpose on the Court': Presiding Judge M. Yvette Miller Is 'Ready for a New Challenge'
- 2Litigation Leaders: Greenspoon Marder’s Beth-Ann Krimsky on What Makes Her Team ‘Prepared, Compassionate and Wicked Smart’
- 3A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
- 4Grabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
- 5Navigating Twitter's 'Rocky Deal Process' Helped Drive Simpson Thacher's Tech and Telecom Practice
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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