<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Connecticut: you can&#8217;t sue opposing lawyer for fraud	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/connecticut-cant-sue-opposing-lawyer-fraud/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/connecticut-cant-sue-opposing-lawyer-fraud/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Oct 2013 18:37:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Boblipton		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2013/10/connecticut-cant-sue-opposing-lawyer-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-239965</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Boblipton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Oct 2013 18:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=39080#comment-239965</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In its decision, the court noted that....

“The mere possibility of such (fraud) claims, which could expose attorneys to harassing and expensive litigation, would be likely to inhibit their freedom in making good faith evidentiary decisions and representations and, therefore, negatively affect their ability to act as zealous advocates for their clients,” Justice Peter Zarella wrote in the majority opinion.&quot;

That ability to act as zealous advocates for their clients includes  harassing and expensive  litigation aimed at non-lawyers, as well as the absolute immunity to commit fraud in court. 

Bob]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In its decision, the court noted that&#8230;.</p>
<p>“The mere possibility of such (fraud) claims, which could expose attorneys to harassing and expensive litigation, would be likely to inhibit their freedom in making good faith evidentiary decisions and representations and, therefore, negatively affect their ability to act as zealous advocates for their clients,” Justice Peter Zarella wrote in the majority opinion.&#8221;</p>
<p>That ability to act as zealous advocates for their clients includes  harassing and expensive  litigation aimed at non-lawyers, as well as the absolute immunity to commit fraud in court. </p>
<p>Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
