Epright v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.

Summary

The court held that Practice Book § 13-4 was not reasonably clear in prohibiting ex parte communications with an opposing party's disclosed expert, so the rule could not support monetary sanctions against the law firm. Because the clarity requirement was dispositive, the court did not uphold the sanctions order on the basis of a rule violation and declined to exercise supervisory authority to create a prospective prohibition. The judgment affirming reversal of the sanctions order was affirmed.