Dorfman v. Smith, 342 Conn. 582 (2022)

Citation: Dorfman v. Smith, 342 Conn. 582 (2022)
Parent Document: Dorfman v. Smith, 342 Conn. 582 (2022)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2022-03-29
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10278647/dorfman-v-smith/ ↗

Full Text

2,778 chars

342 Conn. 582 MARCH, 2022 601
Dorfman v. Smith
9
ney.’’ Simms v. Seaman, supra, 308 Conn. 548; see also
Bruno v. Travelers Cos., supra, 172 Conn. App. 728. The
allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint make clear that
she is challenging the defendant’s conduct in defending
against the underlying underinsured motorist claim.
Specifically, her claim is premised on allegations that
the defendant used ‘‘intentional misstatements, inten-
tional misrepresentations, [and] intentionally deceptive
answers’’ to ‘‘knowingly and intentionally [engage] in
dishonest and sinister litigation practices by taking legal
positions that were without factual support . . . .’’ The
plaintiff clearly premises her claim in this action on
false statements made in pleadings and other docu-
ments filed in relation to the breach of contract claim
in the underlying action.
This court consistently has held that communications
made during and relevant to a judicial proceeding are
afforded immunity because ‘‘[w]itnesses and parties to
judicial proceedings must be permitted to speak freely,
without subjecting their statements and intentions to
later scrutiny by an indignant jury, if the judicial process
is to function.’’ DeLaurentis v. New Haven, 220 Conn.
225, 264, 597 A.2d 807 (1991). It is well established that
‘‘[t]he privilege extends to pleadings and other papers
made a part of a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding,’’
as long as the statements relate sufficiently to issues
involved in a proposed or ongoing judicial proceeding;
(internal quotation marks omitted) Hopkins v. O’Con-
nor, 282 Conn. 821, 833, 925 A.2d 1030 (2007); with the
test for relevancy described as ‘‘generous . . . .’’ Id.,
839. This is true even if the communications are false,
9
As discussed in part II A of this opinion, the fact that the plaintiff alleged
that the conduct at issue constituted an abuse of the judicial system does
not make the claim at issue akin to a claim for abuse of process. Rather,
we look to the plaintiff’s factual allegations to determine whether the plain-
tiff’s claim is premised on the communication of false statements. See Simms
v. Seaman, supra, 308 Conn. 548; see also Bruno v. Travelers Cos., supra,
172 Conn. App. 728.
Page 66 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL March 29, 2022

Other Sections in This Document (164)

Full Text