provided it with immunity from suit, rendering the case
immediately appealable under § 4-183 (a) and (b).
The commission and the complainant moved to dismiss
the administrative appeal, claiming that the trial court
lacked subject matter jurisdiction under both §§ 4-183
and 46a-94a (a), the latter of which governs administra-
tive appeals from orders of the commission, because the
appeal is interlocutory and not from a “final” agency
order. The court denied the commission’s motion to dis-
miss the administrative appeal, concluding that the com-
mission’s order denying the Judicial Branch’s motion to
dismiss was an appealable “final order,” as contemplated
by §§ 4-183 (a) and 46a-94a (a), because it was premised
on a colorable claim of immunity from suit.
With respect to the merits, the trial court followed,
among other cases, Persels & Associates, LLC v. Banking
Commissioner, 318 Conn. 652, 671–73, 122 A.3d 592
(2015), and concluded that “the authority to regulate
[attorneys in the practice of law] and [to] admit attor-
neys to the practice of law in Connecticut is within the
exclusive authority of the Judicial Branch, and, there-
fore, [the commission’s] attempt to assert jurisdiction
over the Judicial Branch’s decisions with respect to [the
complainant’s] application [for reinstatement to the
bar] is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine.”6
The court observed that, “if standing committees were
concerned that a dissatisfied attorney could challenge a
standing committee’s discretionary scheduling decisions
by seeking a public hearing before [the commission],
such a circumstance would significantly interfere with
and delay the orderly function of the attorney admis-
sion and readmission process.” Accordingly, the court
rendered judgment sustaining the Judicial Branch’s
administrative appeal and remanded the case to the
commission with direction to dismiss the matter. See
General Statutes § 4-183 (k).
6
The trial court did not consider the Judicial Branch’s other immunity
claims in its jurisdictional analysis.
State of Connecticut, Judicial Branch v. Commission on Human Rights &
Opportunities, Office of Public Hearings