Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** MARIBETH BENEDETTO LIGHTOWLER ET AL. v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL. (SC 16323)
Borden, Norcott, Katz, Palmer and Vertefeuille, Js. Argued September 26, 2000--officially released April 10, 2001 Counsel

Maria S. Spalding, with whom, on the brief, were John G. Stretton and Jennifer Groves, for the appellant (defendant Steven Brayton). Tracy Alan Saxe, for the appellee (named plaintiff).
Opinion

PALMER, J. This interlocutory appeal arises out of an action brought by the named plaintiff, Maribeth Benedetto Lightowler (plaintiff),1 against Steven Brayton, an attorney, and the named defendant, Brayton's professional liability insurance carrier, Continental Insurance Company (Continental),2 alleging that Brayton had committed legal malpractice in his representation of the plaintiff and her deceased father's estate. The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether the trial court properly denied Brayton's motion to dismiss even though the plaintiff's right to recover against Bray-

ton for his alleged malpractice had been extinguished by virtue of Brayton's discharge in bankruptcy. The plaintiff claims that the trial court properly concluded that she may maintain her action against Brayton because she seeks a judgment against Brayton solely for the purpose of obtaining a recovery under a professional liability insurance policy (policy) under which Brayton was insured and not against Brayton personally. Brayton contends that, because the policy contains a provision stating that Continental's ``right and duty to defend'' is subject to a $5000 deductible payable by Brayton, the plaintiff's action exposes him to personal liability and, therefore, the trial court improperly denied his motion to dismiss in violation of the fresh start policy of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C.

Download Lightowler v. Continental Ins. Co..pdf

Connecticut Law