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

1,313 chars

Tyler v. Tatoian, supra, 164 Conn. App. 93–94. This does
          not mean, however, that a defendant enjoys absolute
          immunity from all CUTPA claims under the litigation
          privilege, even those premised on a violation of CUIPA.
          Rather, we merely hold that this specific claim—a busi-
          ness practice of filing false discovery responses—is
          afforded absolute immunity. We recognize that the leg-
          islature intended to prohibit certain unfair and decep-
          tive business practices by enacting CUTPA and CUIPA,
          but the plaintiff has not cited, and we have not discov-
          ered, any provision of these statutes that explicitly abro-
          gates the common-law litigation privilege, which,
          historically, has been applied to false and malicious
          statements made during and relevant to judicial pro-
          ceedings. Our holding leaves open the possibility that
          other CUTPA claims may not be barred by absolute
          immunity under the litigation privilege. Thus, we con-
          clude that the litigation privilege bars the plaintiff’s
          CUTPA-CUIPA claim.
             The judgment is affirmed.
            In this opinion ROBINSON, C. J., and McDONALD
          and KELLER, Js., concurred.

Other Sections in This Document (164)

Full Text