Brown and Brown, Inc. v. Blumenthal, 297 Conn. 710

Summary

The Supreme Court of Connecticut interpreted the confidentiality protections in General Statutes § 35-42, which governs the attorney general’s preaction investigative authority under the Connecticut Antitrust Act. The court held that materials and information obtained through the investigation generally may not be disclosed to persons outside the attorney general’s office, except to federal or state officials who agree to maintain equivalent confidentiality. The court reversed the trial court’s summary judgment for the attorney general.

Holdings

1. General Statutes § 35-42 bars disclosure of material and information gathered in a Connecticut antitrust investigation to all persons outside the attorney general's office, except officials of other states and the federal government.
2. Before sharing materials or information under § 35-42(g) with officials of other states or the federal government, the attorney general must obtain their agreement to abide by the same confidentiality restrictions applicable to the attorney general.
3. If the attorney general intends to file materials obtained under § 35-42 or include their substance in a pleading, the materials must be lodged under Practice Book §§ 7-4B and 7-4C so that the producing party may seek sealing or limited disclosure; the trial court must then apply Practice Book § 11-20A(c).

Questions Presented

1. Whether General Statutes § 35-42 prohibits the attorney general from disclosing materials and information obtained during a prelitigation antitrust investigation to persons outside the attorney general's office, including third parties and potential competitors.
2. Whether the attorney general may share investigatory materials with officials of other states or the federal government without first obtaining their agreement to maintain the confidentiality required by § 35-42.
3. Whether investigatory materials may be filed or used in a court proceeding without following procedures that allow the producing party to seek sealing or limited disclosure.
4. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment to the attorney general and ordered compliance with the subpoena and interrogatories.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded