Why Police Officers Need to Watch their Speed in Car Chases

A recent settlement by the city of New Haven may now signal to police officers that they need to watch their speeds in car chases. On an evening in February 2006, New Haven police officers were directed to find Jasper Sullivan, a man alleged to have been in possession of illegal drugs.

Officers were able to locate Mr. Sullivan in his vehicle. Mr. Sullivan, however, refused to stop for police, ultimately leading to a high-speed chase for Sullivan through the streets of New Haven. Some witnesses estimated officers drove at speeds ranging from approximately 60 to 90 miles per hour. The car chase ended with Mr. Sullivan violently crashing into the car of Laricha Langley, a then seventeen-year-old girl.

Ms. Langley sued the City of New Haven. Connecticut General Statute § 14-283a authorizes municipalities, such as New Haven, to implement procedures regarding police chases. Because police chases in New Haven are only permitted in cases involving serious crimes, such as murder, rape or kidnapping, Langley argued that New Haven police violated police protocol in their chase for Mr. Sullivan. The city maintained that no chase had actually been initiated. Rather than risk the unpredictability of a trial, the city settled for $727,000.

If you have questions regarding police misconduct or police procedures where you live, please contact the attorneys at Brown, Paindiris & Scott.  

Connecticut Issues Licenses for the Production of Medical Marijuana

On January 28, 2014, four Connecticut companies were awarded producer’s licenses making them the first legal medical marijuana farms in the state. By April, Connecticut expects to issue between three and five medical marijuana dispensary licenses. Thus far, there have been 27 applications for dispensary licenses. 

In 2012, Connecticut state legislature passed a law legalizing medical marijuana. Those patients seeking to use medical marijuana must have a doctor’s note and register with the Department of Consumer Protection. Currently, there are over 1,500 patients registered to use medical marijuana in Connecticut. 

Landlord’s Remedies upon the Death of a Tenant

As a landlord whose tenant has passed away, you may be unsure of what to do and what your rights are. Can you dispose of the deceased tenant’s personal property? Do you have to wait a certain period? Under Connecticut law, there are specific steps you must follow in a situation like this that will allow you to protect your interests and re-rent the vacant property in a reasonable time.

The process may be shortened if you know of cooperative next of kin but typically, as a landlord, you must wait 45 days after giving notice to the family before you may legally remove the deceased tenant’s belongings from the property. After 45 days have passed, you may move the belongings to a storage facility for an additional 15 days before the belongings may be sold at a public auction.

Be sure to know your rights if you find yourself in this position so that you can handle an unfortunate situation in a professional and efficient manner.

David Rintoul Presents program on ERISA Basics For Labor & Employment Law Attorneys

David Rintoul presented the education program on ERISA Basics For Labor & Employment  Law Attorneys for the November 12, 2013 meeting of the Connecticut Employment Lawyers Association or “CELA.”  The program covered what an attorney needs to know when sitting with a client with a prospective ERISA benefit claim.  He discussed appeals of long-term disability benefit denials and other employee benefits with the insurers, and why pursuing the process effectively is crucial to any litigation of ERISA benefit appeals.   CELA is an organization for lawyers who spend at least fifty percent of their employment practice representing employees.

David presented a similar program to the Labor & Employment Section of the Connecticut Bar Association in the fall.  David is currently Treasurer of the Section, and is Chair of the sections Retirement and Employee Benefits Sub-Committee

You can find the materials he presented at the meeting on the Employment Benefits practice area page of this website.  

Now is as good a time as any!

“Now is as good a time as any.”  That is especially the case after entering a guilty plea and before being sentenced to nine months incarceration.  Just ask 29 year-old Kevin R. Smith of New London.  On Wednesday of this week (January 15, 2014) Mr. Smith was admitting to a violation of his probation in Superior Court in New London.  Judge John M. Newson canvassed Mr. Smith, ensuring that he understood the rights he was waiving by admitting to this violation.  At the end of the canvassing, the Judge asked Mr. Smith if he had anything to add.  In response, Mr. Smith wheeled around to the gallery of onlookers, caught his girlfriend’s eye, went down to one knee and asked her to marry him.  Mr. Smith’s new fiancée said “yes” and Mr. Smith was then sentenced to nine months incarceration and escorted from the courtroom, leaving behind the whimpers of his new fiancée and the lingering question for onlookers:  why would you agree to add a life sentence on top of your nine months?

Seller Beware: New Carbon Monoxide Affidavit Required for Sale of Residential Property

Planning on selling your home? As a seller, there is a new Connecticut law you should be aware of. Effective January 1, 2014, sellers of residential property must present a signed affidavit to the buyer at closing, attesting to the existence and capabilities of the carbon monoxide detectors on the premises. Specifically, the seller must supply a sworn statement that the building has carbon monoxide detectors installed pursuant to manufacturer instructions that are capable of showing the amount of carbon monoxide present in parts per million and that are capable of providing an alarm suitable to warn any occupants. Any seller who does not wish to provide this affidavit must credit the buyer $250 at closing.

For the sale of title to any building for which the building permit was issued before October 1, 1985, the seller must also attest to the presence and capabilities of any smoke detectors on the premises. Any smoke detectors must be capable of sensing visible or invisible smoke particles, must be installed within the immediate vicinity of the bedrooms, and must be capable of providing an alarm suitable to warn any occupants.

The Supreme Court DOMA Ruling: What happened and what are the future implications?

 

On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision held that Section 7 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which limited the definition of marriage to heterosexual couples, violated the Fifth Amendment.

Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer were a legally married same-sex couple. When Spyer died in 2009, the federal government did not allow the estate tax exemption for bequests to widows because of DOMA. Spyer’s estate was forced to pay the tax.

In United States v. Windsor, Windsor challenged Sec. 7 of DOMA on the grounds that the law violated the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. The Supreme Court agreed, stating that the principle purpose of Sec. 7 of DOMA was to demean those in homosexual marriages and to deprive homosexual couples of the rights and privileges that were available to heterosexual couples under the federal laws. The government returned the federal estate taxes that had been paid from Spyer’s estate.   

DOMA has not been invalidated in its entirety. The Supreme Court’s decision is limited only to Sec. 7 of DOMA. While the Windsor ruling does not legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, the ruling has allowed for same-sex couples to enjoy certain rights and benefits under federal law which were previously unavailable to them, such as filing a joint federal income tax return. 

Sec. 3 of DOMA, which is still in effect, gives states discretion in choosing whether to recognize any legally formed same-sex relationship.  Same-sex married couples would be wise to seek legal advice on protecting their rights to the extent possible before traveling or moving to a state which will not recognize their legal relationship.