No Oral Arguments This Week at Connecticut Supreme Court Amid COVID-19 Precautions
The seventh term was set to begin next week. The court might also postpone its eighth and last term of the session, which is set to begin April 27.
March 24, 2020 at 11:47 AM
2 minute read
Connecticut Supreme Court building in Hartford. Photo: Natalia Bratslavsky/Shutterstock.com
The Connecticut Supreme Court became the last court in the state to issue a directive saying it was postponing hearing cases, with an announcement from Chief Justice Richard Robinson last week that the 10 cases scheduled for oral arguments for the court's seventh session would be postponed due to concerns over COVID-19.
In an email sent to the Connecticut Law Tribune, Robinson said oral arguments scheduled to take place from March 24 to April 2 would be heard at a to-be-determined date. He said no decision has been made as to the court's next session—the final one of the term—which is set to begin April 27. After that, the first term of the 2020-21 session is set begin in September.
Robinson said the court was holding off hearing oral arguments, but said the Supreme Court building in Hartford would remain open.
Robinson said the delay was needed "to promote public and personal health during the COVID-19 crisis."
Robinson also said that "future assignable cases determined to be priority cases, where delay will work an injustice, will be heard either by video conference, considered without oral arguments if waived by counsel, or will be heard in a courtroom if necessary."
Robinson's announcement comes on the heels of similar announcements made for the Connecticut Superior Court, Connecticut Appellate Court and the three federal courts in the state.
Last week, for example, Connecticut superior courts announced delays of all future jury selections and trials through at least April 13. Juries sitting before the March 13 directive would continue in those trials.
Related stories:
Delaware Supreme Court Cancels Oral Arguments Through May Due to Coronavirus Concerns
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 All
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
State High Court Adopts Modern Standard for Who Keeps $70K Engagement Ring After Breakup
Mass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
3 minute read
Trending Stories
- 13 New Judges: Here's Who Kemp Just Appointed to the Bench
- 2Apple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
- 3Texas Supreme Court to Review "Implied" Performance Controversy in Oil-Gas Leases
- 4Collections Are Critical for Texas Law Firms Through Year's End
- 5US Judge Rejects Investor Claim That Target Hid Pandemic Inventory Issues
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
