From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

GANAVAGE v. CATE

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Waterbury at Waterbury
Mar 31, 2010
2010 Ct. Sup. 7891 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2010)

Opinion

No. UWY CV07-5005750S

March 31, 2010


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION


On August 18, 2009, this Court (Agati, J.) dismissed the plaintiff's case for failure to appear. On November 10, 2009, the plaintiff (Marissa Macburney Ganavage) filed a motion to vacate the order of dismissal. On February 17, 2010, the Court (Cronan, J.) denied the plaintiff's motion which appeared on the short calendar non-arguable docket.

The Court's reasoning for this action is that the plaintiff (Marissa Macburney Ganavage), who is not an attorney, improperly filed an implied pro se appearance on behalf of her minor daughter (Jordyn Ganavage). Connecticut General Statutes § 51-88(a) provides in part that a person not admitted as an attorney "shall not practice law or appear as an attorney-at-law for another in any court of record in this state." The Court feels that this issue was adequately discussed in Lowe v. Shelton, 83 Conn.App. 750 (2004), and in Vaneck v. Burzin et al. (2009), WL 765483 [ 47 Conn. L. Rptr. 302].


Summaries of

GANAVAGE v. CATE

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Waterbury at Waterbury
Mar 31, 2010
2010 Ct. Sup. 7891 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2010)
Case details for

GANAVAGE v. CATE

Case Details

Full title:MARISSA MACBURNEY GANAVAGE ET AL. v. PAULA CATE, CMN ET AL

Court:Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Waterbury at Waterbury

Date published: Mar 31, 2010

Citations

2010 Ct. Sup. 7891 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2010)