Justice was given a new venue on Wednesday when the Connecticut Supreme Court brought deliberations for two court cases, one criminal and the other civil, to Fairfield University.
At the sound of the gavel, the audience stood as the seven justices entered the stage in their flowing black robes to participate in the second of the two cases. The civil case, AllState Insurance Company vs. Stephen Palumbo, concentrated on the debate over the legitimacy of insurance coverage for Palumbo and his fiancée, Lisa Deveau.
On Jan. 31, 2002, after accidentally setting fire to the house in which Palumbo, Deveau and Deveau’s daughter lived, Palumbo filed a claim with AllState Insurance Company to pay for the damages. The damage to the house was estimated at about $60,000, according to papers released by the court.
Palumbo was given the payment by AllState, but was sued soon after by the insurance company because he was not listed on the insurance plan. Only Deveau’s name appeared on the payments for or the official description of the insurance, as she was the official owner of the home. As a result, AllState demanded that Palumbo reimburse them for the money they had paid him to cover the damages in an equitable subrogation action.
“Otherwise, [Palumbo] will be unjustly enriched,” said the counsel for AllState, explaining that the money needed to repaid immediately to fulfill AllState’s legal demands.
The first two lower courts found in favor of AllState. However, Palumbo brought the case back once again, this time to the Supreme Court, arguing that as a full-time resident in the house, an equal contributor to home expenses and without a house or home insurance of his own, he was in fact a tenant of Deveau’s. This contingency would grant him dismissal from AllState’s equitable subrogation demand.
A debate soon ensued over the use of the term “tenant” instead of “social guest” – each side argued that Palumbo was a different type of resident. Because the definitions can be bent to conform to either side’s argument, the judges had a challenging time determining which correctly applied to Palumbo. They questioned both the plaintiff and the defense about the specific interactions and expectations between Palumbo and Deveau in order to gain a better understanding about the relationship in terms of the residence.
Finally, the counsel for Palumbo offered a new suggestion to the justices, saying, “I believe his proper definition is as cohabitator.” By the end of the discussions, the court had three different definition options, each of which would end with a different consequence for Palumbo. The ruling on the case, however, will not be issued for at least a few months, as it must follow the general Supreme Court decision-making process.
The audience was able to view the arguments given by the counsels for both the plaintiff, AllState Insurance Company, and the defense, Stephen Palumbo, throughout the cases as they spoke in the makeshift courtroom constructed on the stage of the auditorium.
Immediately following each of the cases, a question-and-answer session gave students an opportunity to voice their questions to experts in the field. Attorneys Justin Clark and Daniel Klau conducted the panels, using their personal experience from serving as Supreme Court law clerks to respond to student inquiries.
According to a University press release, the Court’s visit is a part of “Supreme Court on Circuit”, a program in which the Court travels around the state to better educate community members, especially students and educators, about the justice system. The program has been in effect for over 20 years.
Matthew Sullivan, a junior at Fairfield, thought the program was worthwhile.
“It was a great opportunity to have real-life experience rather than just a textbook explanation,” he said. He went on to explain that although he is currently enrolled in a class focused on the U.S. Supreme Court, seeing the proceedings at the “Court on Circuit” provided him with a manner in which he could see the actual operation of the court, rather than just focus on the final decisions in a variety of historical cases.
Sullivan’s sentiments were echoed by other Fairfield students who attended the court sessions. Erika Gjestby, a sophomore at Fairfield University with an interest in law and politics, also appreciated the opportunity to experience courtroom proceedings firsthand.
“We were able to really get a feel for how the court actually works,” she said. “Instead of seeing just an outsider’s view, like reading about the case in a newspaper, it gave me a chance to really see under the surface.”
No comments:
Post a Comment