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: