Court: Supreme Court of Connecticut; August 24, 1999; Connecticut; State Supreme Court
F. Woodward Lewis, Jr. brought two writs of error against defendants James Kobernat, Vicki Kobernat, and Vincent T. McManus. The first issue concerns whether the trial court improperly sanctioned Lewis for noncompliance with a discovery order. The second issue involves the trial court's decision to disqualify Lewis from representing Green Rock Ridge, Inc. in its litigation against the Kobernats and McManus. Both writs are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, precluding examination of their merits.
The underlying cases include a counterclaim by the Kobernats against Green Rock (Green Rock I) and a separate action by Green Rock seeking damages for nonpayment of rent and other claims against the Kobernats and McManus (Green Rock II). Green Rock, a New Hampshire corporation, leased a property to the Kobernats from June 1, 1995, to May 31, 1996. The Kobernats moved in prior to the lease start date and discovered damage to the property. After failing to resolve the issue, Green Rock initiated a summary process action for nonpayment of rent and subsequently filed for damages, claiming denial of access to the property for repairs and other breaches by the Kobernats. In response, the Kobernats counterclaimed, alleging violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and asserting that the property was uninhabitable due to code violations, thus no rent was owed. Green Rock partially repaired the property but only obtained a compliance certificate in December 1995. Lewis served as trial attorney for Green Rock from September 1995 to September 1997.
On September 11, 1997, Lewis was disqualified from representing Green Rock due to his status as a material witness, leading to Bruce A. Chaplin taking over representation. On March 9, 1998, the Kobernats served Lewis with a deposition subpoena, prompting Green Rock to file a motion to quash based on attorney-client privilege. The trial court required Lewis to appear for deposition but decided to address privilege claims on a question-by-question basis. During the deposition, Lewis invoked attorney-client privilege for nearly all questions, resulting in the Kobernats filing sanctions against Green Rock and Lewis. Chaplin subsequently withdrew as counsel, citing irreconcilable differences, and the court granted sanctions against Lewis, ordering him to pay $750.90 and to appear for another deposition on June 16, 1998. Lewis paid the sanction but did not attend the deposition. On June 12, 1998, he filed a writ of error to challenge the deposition order and to seek a refund of the sanction. The defendants moved to dismiss the writ, but this was denied without prejudice. The court requested clarification on whether the deposition order was interlocutory. Lewis later sought to stay all trial court actions and disqualify McManus from representing the Kobernats, which the court denied. The court also dismissed part of the writ concerning Lewis's testimony requirement. During oral arguments, it was noted that Lewis had since been deposed satisfactorily. In April 1998, Lewis initially represented Green Rock in another civil action against the Kobernats and McManus, but the Kobernats moved to disqualify him, a motion that the trial court granted. Lewis subsequently filed a second writ of error to contest this disqualification.
Lewis filed a writ of error challenging the trial court's orders requiring him to attend another deposition and imposing monetary sanctions. The court dismissed the writ due to lack of jurisdiction, determining that the issue concerning the deposition order was moot, as it did not present an actual controversy capable of judicial relief. The court highlighted that appellate jurisdiction necessitates an existing controversy; thus, it cannot rule on moot questions. Regarding the sanctions, the court ruled that such orders are not final judgments and cannot be appealed unless the individual refuses to comply and is held in contempt. Since Lewis complied with the sanctions by paying $750.90 to McManus and was not found in contempt, there was no final judgment available for appellate review. Consequently, the writ of error was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Lewis contests the trial court's decision to disqualify him from representing Green Rock in its case against the defendants, arguing that the disqualification was improper. However, a recent ruling indicates that a disqualified attorney lacks standing to challenge such an order via writ of error, leading to the dismissal of Lewis's writ. The Practice Book 72-1 outlines that writs of error can only address legal errors from final judgments and cannot be used if the error could have been appealed or if the parties consented to a court’s ruling without a right to appeal. Green Rock, as a party in both cases, cannot pursue its claims through these writs and must address them via appeal. The case Green Rock II involves a counterclaim from the Kobernats, who allege violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act after Green Rock withdrew its claims against them. The Kobernats' counterclaim is the only matter remaining for litigation, with McManus representing himself in this dispute. Additionally, the summary process action was dismissed, and there were other actions filed by Green Rock against the Kobernats, but details on those are absent. Under General Statutes 42-110b (a), deceptive practices in trade are prohibited, and the Wallingford housing code mandates that a certificate of compliance be obtained before a dwelling can be rented again. The Kobernats claimed they took possession of the house due to urgent circumstances, but compliance with the housing code was required before re-letting.
General Statutes 47a-5 imposes a civil penalty of up to twenty dollars per day for up to 200 days on owners or lessors of buildings occupied without a required certificate of occupancy. Rule 3.7(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct prohibits a lawyer from acting as an advocate in a trial where they are likely to be a necessary witness. Lewis, the president of Green Rock, invoked attorney-client privilege to decline answering over seventy questions during a deposition. His refusals included inquiries about his identity, knowledge of individuals, and specifics about the company. McManus warned Lewis of potential sanctions for what he believed were unfounded claims of privilege. The trial court ultimately imposed monetary sanctions on Lewis to cover McManus's deposition costs and motion fees. In comparing this case to CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, the distinctions noted include that Lewis was sanctioned as a deponent rather than as an attorney, and the sanctions were related to discovery rather than pleading misconduct. The precedent from CFM is confined to its specific context regarding sanctions.
