163 Conn.App. 419
Conn. App. Ct.2016Background
- Vexatious litigation action against the Welleses and their attorney Sconyers/Ackerly Brown arises from a prior injunction dispute over a right‑of‑way maintenance and deed interpretation.
- Underlying action: Welleses sought an injunction against Chester Lichaj for snowplowing the right‑of‑way; trial court granted injunction against Lichaj; appellate court reversed the injunction and required proper interpretation of the deed.
- Lichajes’ counterclaims included intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and tort claims arising from alleged abusive conduct during plowing.
- Prior appellate opinion held the trial court abused its discretion and misinterpreted the deed’s maintenance provisions; remanded for further proceedings.
- Present case alleges statutory and common‑law vexatious litigation based on the underlying action; Sconyers moved for summary judgment, arguing probable cause to sue existed.
- Court held: (1) probable cause existed for pursuing the underlying action against Nicole Lichaj; (2) denial of a prior summary judgment motion can be probative of probable cause; (3) the vexatious‑litigation claim against Sconyers and firm was properly resolved in favor of summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was probable cause to sue Nicole Lichaj in the underlying action | Lichaj lacked probable cause | Probable cause existed for Nicole Lichaj | |
| Whether denial of a prior summary judgment establishes lack of probable cause | Denial is not dispositive | Denial supports probable cause | Denial can be conclusive evidence of probable cause in this context |
| What is the governing standard for probable cause in vexatious litigation against attorneys | Objective, fact‑based standard | Reasonable attorney could believe in probable cause | Probable cause is an objective standard based on facts known when suit began |
Key Cases Cited
- Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262 (Conn. App. 2009) (probable cause analysis guidance in vexatious litigation context)
- Schaeppi v. Unifund CCR Partners, 161 Conn. App. 33 (Conn. App. 2015) (probable cause standard; appellate review of the issue)
- Demarest v. Fire Dept., 76 Conn. App. 24 (Conn. App. 2003) (indispensable/necessary parties concept for suit impact)