above all else, integrity is demanded.” (Citations omit-
ted.) Id., 186.
As this court explained in Statewide Grievance Com-
mittee v. Ganim, 311 Conn. 430, 87 A.3d 1078 (2014), it
is for the Superior Court to “decid[e] whether to accept
or reject a standing committee recommendation on rein-
statement to the bar,” subject to its appellate review
function. Id., 450. The Superior Court “reviews [a] stand-
ing committee’s decision on [the] record to determine
whether [the standing committee] has conducted a fair
and impartial investigation, and whether it acted fairly
and reasonably or from prejudice and ill will in its con-
sideration of the application [for reinstatement to the
bar]. . . . Ultimately, the court must decide whether the
standing committee, by approving or withholding its
approval of an application [for reinstatement], acted
arbitrarily or unreasonably or in abuse of its discretion
or without a fair investigation of the facts.” (Citation
omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 451; see
also, e.g., Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller,
Docket No. DBD-CV-XX-XXXXXXX-S, 2022 WL 1060741,
*1–3 (Conn. Super. March 30, 2022) (discussing proce-
dural history of complainant’s reinstatement proceed-
ings). Although “committees of the bar” provide “help
and assistance” in the Judicial Branch’s regulation of
the practice of law; Heiberger v. Clark, supra, 148 Conn.
186; “[a] committee can act . . . only under the supervi-
sion of the court. It is the court, and not the committee,
[that] takes the final and decisive action.” Id., 183. This
authority of the Superior Court, and, ultimately, of the
Judicial Branch, includes the authority to review not only
a standing committee’s conclusions, but also its actions
through the judicial review process. See, e.g., Statewide
Grievance Committee v. Ganim, supra, 450–51. This
authority is exclusive to the Judicial Branch as a corol-
lary of both its “sole authority to license and regulate
the general practice of law in Connecticut”; Persels &
Associates, LLC v. Banking Commissioner, supra, 318
Conn. 673; and its authority to obtain assistance from
“committees of the bar, pursuant to rules having the
State of Connecticut, Judicial Branch v. Commission on Human Rights &
Opportunities, Office of Public Hearings