Cordi-Allen v. Halloran, No. 06-1664 affirms a grant of summary judgment in favor of a lawyer, and against his client under Connecticut malpractice law and tort law involving a workers compensation client that couldn’t get along with her lawyer resulting in his withdrawl. The First parses though the various writings, and concludes that the plaintiffs are really claiming thus: Halloran breached the contract by withdrawing, forcing them to pay for a new lawyer. Looking at the writings, and Connecticut Rule of Professional Conduct 1.16, the court concludes that there was nothing to bind the defendant in perpetuity to the plaintiff, and that he fulfilled any duties implied at law in the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Alternatively, the court notes that if this was a tort case, the statute of limitations would have begun to run when the defendants motion to withdraw was granted.
The District Court did not provide any reasoning in its memorandum.