“Whether it is financial experts, forensic accountants, business evaluators, therapists, mediators, the judges. Those relationships that we form… give our clients the best possible outcome in their case.”
Five documented facts about Connecticut family court — in the participants’ own words and public records. Every fact below carries a numbered source. Check them yourself. That is the point.
A small law firm in Old Greenwich — about eight lawyers — represents one side of Connecticut divorce cases. In its own marketing, a partner names the firm’s competitive advantage out loud: relationships with “the judges.” [1]
Meanwhile, the statewide rules that govern every Connecticut family courtroom were developed through years of documented meetings with a bar committee whose officer seats have rotated through this same firm — including the lawyer who is, right now, the committee’s sitting Secretary while she litigates cases under those rules. [2][3][4]
Connecticut’s judicial ethics code does not wait for proof of bias. It says a judge must disclose, on the record, anything the people in the courtroom “might reasonably consider relevant” to fairness. [5]
None of this was ever disclosed to the families in those courtrooms.
You do not have to believe anyone broke a law. You only have to answer one question honestly: if you were the parent on the other side, would you have wanted to know?
Nothing below is an allegation. It is the firm’s own advertising, the court system’s own published account, the firm’s own website, the public docket, and the ethics rule that already exists.
The quote at the top of this page is verbatim, from the firm’s own promotional video, publicly distributed under its own name — preserved with a cryptographic hash. It is the firm’s own theory of why you should hire them. Nobody investigating this wrote it. The firm did.
[1] verbatim transcript at 00:02:24–00:02:40
A statewide trial-management order took effect January 1, 2025 in every Connecticut family court — with teeth, including the power to exclude a parent’s evidence. By the court system’s own published account, it was developed across “at least seven” meetings with the bar’s family-law section in 2021–2022. That section’s Chair in 2023: a partner at the firm. Its sitting Secretary today: another partner — litigating under those rules right now.
[2][3][4][8] court system's published article; firm's own bios; CBA officer page
March 29, 2022: a bar program teaches lawyers “what is a judge looking for during a TRO hearing.” Teaching it: the judge who now runs Connecticut’s Family Division statewide. Delivering his introduction: a partner of the same firm. Twelve months later, he was elevated. His own published article rests its first footnote on an article by the son of the firm’s founder.
[7][9][10] published CLE agenda pp. 6–8; journal article fn. 1
Roughly eight lawyers: officer seats — most reaching the top chair — at the CT Bar’s Family Law Section, the Bench/Bar Committee itself, the 22-member matrimonial academy chapter, the Greenwich Bar Association, the Fairfield County bar’s family section, and the Stamford courthouse Special Masters program (one partner co-chaired it for twelve years). All listed proudly on the firm’s own website.
[3][4][6][12] the firm's own attorney bios + public bar records
Rule 2.11 of Connecticut’s Code of Judicial Conduct places an affirmative duty on judges: disclose, on the record, information the parties “might reasonably consider relevant” — even if the judge believes there is no basis for disqualification. The dockets show no disclosure of any of it: not the consultation history, not the introduction, not the officer overlaps, not the marketing. Disclosure is cheap. It is a paragraph on the record. It never happened.
[5][13] Code of Judicial Conduct R. 2.11; docket review through June 2026
This is not a bribery story. It is a disclosure story. [14]
Narrated. Every claim on screen carries its source number.
If you were the parent on the other side…
would you have wanted to know?
Connecticut legislators vote on every judge’s reappointment every eight years — and on whether family-court data becomes public. Your two emails go further than you think.
Every Connecticut address has one State Representative and one State Senator. The official lookup takes 30 seconds and shows their email addresses.
Find my legislators →Copy it, paste it into an email to both legislators, and add your name and town. Editing a sentence in your own words makes it count even more.
The whole ask fits in one text message. Send it to three Connecticut friends — that’s how a one-sentence reform becomes a question every legislator has heard.
Every fact above carries a numbered source: the firm’s own marketing video (preserved, hash-verified), the court system’s own published rulemaking article, the firm’s own attorney bios, the published CLE agenda, the Code of Judicial Conduct, and the public docket.
If you had a Connecticut family case with this firm on the other side and the process never sat right — your case file may matter more than you think.
Call 1-877-542-4578 or visit sgbclassaction.com. Confidential intake.
The class-action intake is a separate effort with a separate site. Writing your legislators requires no affiliation with any case.