Correspondence from Floyd to Assistant Attorney General Re: Request for Expedited Consideration

    MOLLER, HORTON & RICE, P.C. 
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

S90 GILLETT STREET 

HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06105 

WILLIAM R. MOLLER™ TELEPHONE 

WESLEY W. HORTON (203) 522-8338 

CHARLES M. RICE, JR. TELECOPIER 

ALEXANDRA DAVIS (203) 728-0401 

ROBERT M. SHIELDS, JR. 
SUSAN M. CORMIER 
KIMBERLY A. KNOX 
KAREN L. MURDOCH March 8, 1993 

*ALSO ADMITTED IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Mr. William H. Juall 
Court Monitor 
SUPERIOR COURT 

Court Reporters' Office 
101 Lafayette Street 
Hartford, Cr 9061006 

Re: Sheff v. O'Neill 

Dear Bill: 

In response to your letter, this is to assure you that the 
plaintiffs will abide by the agreement we made before trial. 

Very truly yours, 

we 
Wesley W. Horton 

WWH:3t 

 



    

  

  

Court Reporters' Office 

101 Lafayette St. 
Hartford, CT 06106 

John R. Whelan, AAG 

110 Sherman Street 

Hartford, CT 06105 

RE: Sheff v. O'Neill - CV-89 360977 S 

Dear Mr. Whelan: 

Here is the accounting of the transcripts 1 have done in 

this case that you requested: 

Transcripts done in segence: 1/85, 1/86,.1/7, 1/14. 

Transcripts done out of sequence: 1/8, 1/12, 1/13, 1/285, 

2/2,"2/3. 

Transcripts to be done: Y/15, 1/20,.1/2%, 1/22, 1/27, 2/11, 

2/28, 2/17. 

I had informed Judge Hammer before the close of evidence 

in this case that I expected to have all my transcripts done 

by March 15, 1993. Since Ms. Budihas has also made assurances 

that her work will be completed by that date, it appears 

that the Court and the parties in this three month long case 

will have complete certified transcripts of the proceedings 

within about two weeks of the close of evidence. I believe 

that this kind of production would be considered more than 

expedited by any court in this country. Please note that 

under the stringent production requirements imposed on our 

department by the state, a reporter who sat in a trial of 

this length would be allowed, by my calculation, almost a 

year to produce the transcripts. 

In any event, pursuant to my telephone conversation of 3/2/33, 

with Mr. Whelan, I understand the fee agreement on this trans- 

cript to be as follows: All transcripts produced by my self- 

imposed deadline of March 15 will be billed at the rate ne- 

totiated before trial, which has been in effect to date. 

However, if any transcripts are not completed by that date, 

which I don't believe will happen, they will be produced 

as expedited transcripts but billed at the minimum state 

rate. : E ; 

      
 



  

  

  

  

Could I implore the parties, if the agreement is not as I 
have ' stated it here, or if any party will have ‘a problem 
abiding with the agreement as described here, to please inform 
me of this immediately, as I have a touchy situation coming 
up with the Appellate Court soon, which would be fairly easy 
to obviate were it not for the onus of Sheff v. O'Neill. 

Sincerely Yours, 

“Ne Old pr 
William H. Juall 

Court Monitor 

CC Judge Hammer 

Joe Moan, Official Reporter 

Wesley Horton, Esq.