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. ******************************************************

SHARLYNN RHODE v. ROBERTO MILLA ET AL. (SC 17860)
Norcott, Katz, Palmer, Vertefeuille and Schaller, Js. Argued March 17--officially released July 15, 2008

David S. Migliore, with whom, on the brief, was Jeffrey D. Cedarfield for the appellants (defendants).

Opinion

NORCOTT, J. The principal issue in this appeal is whether a nonparty witness' invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination pursuant to the fifth amendment of the United States constitution1 constitutes admissible evidence in a civil case. The defendants, Roberto Milla and Rutila Enamorado, appeal2 from the judgment of the trial court in a personal injury action rendered after a jury trial in favor of the plaintiff, Sharlynn Rhode.3 On appeal, the defendants claim that the trial court improperly: (1) admitted into evidence bills from Richard Fogel, the plaintiff's chiropractor, pursuant to General Statutes

Download Rhode v. Milla.pdf

Connecticut Law