In a complex dispute involving multimillion-dollar private equity investments and hedge fund ownership, the Connecticut Appellate Court ruled in favor of Pastore LLC clients over investors represented by Wiggin and Dana. The trial court consolidated two related actions and removed both cases from the jury docket just weeks before trial. Despite repeated filings including jury trial claims, the trial court held that those claims were untimely under Connecticut General Statutes § 52-215, concluded that the parties had not provided valid written consent, and proceeded instead with a bench trial that resulted in judgments against the appellants.
On appeal, the Connecticut Appellate Court reversed, holding that the parties’ filings, including jury claims and certificates of closed pleadings, constituted binding written consent under § 52-215. The Court emphasized that once such consent is given, it cannot be unilaterally withdrawn, and timeliness is not a barrier where written consent exists. The decision reaffirms the strength of Connecticut’s jury trial statute, clarifies that written consent may be established through procedural filings, and ensures that litigants’ constitutional right to a jury trial is preserved.
Pastore LLC’s appellate team, including Joseph M. Pastore III, Melissa Rose McClammy, Paul Fenaroli and Tyler Rutherford, successfully argued that the trial court’s approach undermined both statute and precedent, persuading the Appellate Court to restore the cases to the jury docket. This ruling not only protects the rights of the firm’s clients but also establishes an important precedent for future Connecticut litigants by confirming that properly documented filings satisfy the written consent standard. The decision underscores the firm’s commitment to safeguarding procedural rights and achieving impactful results in high-stakes commercial litigation and financial services.