Phone: (860) 236-7673
92 Hopmeadow St
Simsbury, Connecticut 06089
Carmine Perri will protect your rights. He will defend you against nursing facilities that commence collection actions. He will represent you in will contests, conservatorships, and other contested Probate matters. He will hold accountable those who are responsible for financial exploitation and elder abuse. And, because he knows how Medicaid works, he knows what it takes to win a Medicaid case for you. His goal, put simply, is to protect your rights.
Carmine represents individuals from all over the country as well as internationally.Elder Law Litigation
- Paul Valliere et al. v. Commissioner of Social Services, SC 19701- The Department of Social Services appealed a Superior Court decision (J. Noble) that stated, “pursuant to [federal law, state law] as well as the commissioner’s own policy manual, the department is obliged to adopt a Probate Court order (J. Mahon) awarding a CSA [Community Spouse Allowance] where the order predates an institutionalized person’s application for Medicaid.” The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the Probate Court did not exceed its authority under section 45a-655 by ordering community spouse support in an amount that exceeded that which the Department of Social Services could order pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1396r-5. This case has wide-ranging implications regarding Medicaid eligibility and the practice of law within our state's Probate Courts.
- Before the Connecticut Supreme Court, Carmine successfully defended a client against a proposed collection tactic by a nursing facility (Wilton Meadows Limited Partnership vs. Sally Coratolo). The client’s husband was a resident of the facility and was unable to pay for the first months of his stay. About 6 months after his death, the facility sued Sally Coratolo, claiming that she was liable for her husband’s debt. Carmine argued before the Supreme Court on Sally’s behalf and won. This case is an important one because it shows that nursing facilities are looking for alternative grounds for recovery beyond the admission agreement and it underscores the Court’s intention to prevent the admission agreement from requiring third party guarantors of payment.
- In an April 2023 decision, after a 4 day Fair Hearing, Attorney Perri, on behalf of his client, successfully advocated for the reduction of a $872K transfer penalty imposed by the Department of Social Services. The Fair Hearing Officer's decision stated, in part, “There is clear and convincing evidence that the transfers were made for a purpose other than qualifying for assistance therefore the Department’s action to assign a penalty is not correct.” The final decision was made that the applicant’s appeal was granted.
- In a 2022 decision, after six days of a heavily contested involuntary conservatorship trial, Carmine successfully demonstrated to a Probate Court the necessity to appoint a conservator in accordance with his client’s request to the court.
- In a February 2019 decision, Carmine successfully helped a client appeal, at the administrative fair hearing level, a caseworker's decision to impose a transfer of assets penalty. Carmine’s client had a Personal and Financial Services Agreement in place with her POA and friend. Carmine, and his client, proved to a fair hearing officer that the agreement was legally sound and enforceable and that services provided by the friend were in accordance with the agreement, thereby reversing the imposition of a penalty.
- In a March 2022 decision, Carmine successfully defended the validity of a Will in a three-day trial that considered over 50 exhibits. The court found the Will to be properly executed, the testator did not lack testamentary capacity, and the testator was not unduly influenced.
- In a seven-day trial, as stated in a March 2022 decision, Carmine successfully defended the validity of a husband and wife’s Wills being contested in the probate court. In the same trial, Carmine defended the couple’s capacity to execute a deed. The court found the couple each had mind and memory to be sound enough to execute a Will, found no direct evidence of undue influence exerted over the couple, and found the deed to be a valid instrument of conveyance.
- After a five-day trial, as stated in a January 2021 decision, Carmine successfully represented a child who was arguing that the purported Will of her deceased father was the product of undue influence. The Will was invalidated and not admitted for Probate.
- In a six-day trial, as stated in an April 2021 decision, Carmine represented a primary beneficiary in getting a Will, that was executed shortly before the passing of the decedent, admitted to Probate Court.
- In February 2018, Carmine was successful in representing a client who was seeking to admit her father’s Will to Probate which was being contested. Although the Will was executed shortly before the father passed away, the Will was admitted to Probate by the court.
- In an April 2017 decision, Carmine successfully represented a proposed executrix who sought to admit a Last Will & Testament despite a family member’s challenge to its admission based on undue influence grounds. The Court admitted the Will and appointed Carmine’s client as executrix.
- As reflected in a May 2016 Memorandum of Decision, Carmine successfully argued to the Probate Court that an alleged Will did not reflect the decedent’s testamentary intentions since the decedent did not have mind and memory sound enough to execute the alleged Will.
- After a two day Will contest in Probate Court, he challenged an amendment to a Last Will and Testament which resulted in the invalidation of the codicil. The court held that the decedent lacked the testamentary capacity to execute the codicil.
- In an August 2017 decision, Carmine sufficiently established that a decedent, who was near death, understood the business upon which she was engaged in at the time of Will execution and that she was not unduly influenced into signing the Will.
- In a February 2020 Superior Court decision, Carmine represented three siblings in securing a judgment against their father’s second wife based on a Tortious Interference with the expectation of Inheritance claim.
- In a May 2023 Superior Court decision, Carmine successfully represented plaintiffs in removing a trustee who was mismanaging a family trust. As the result of the breach of fiduciary duty by the trustee, the plaintiffs were awarded the return of damages and attorney’s fees.
- In an April 2022 decision after a two-day trial, Carmine successfully argued to remove a fiduciary from an estate because the fiduciary failed to administer the estate effectively.
- In a 2021 decision, Carmine successfully represented a beneficiary of an estate who was seeking to remove a fiduciary who failed to distribute the assets of the estate. The Probate Court ruled in Carmine’s client’s favor because of issues caused by the fiduciary’s mismanagement of the estate administration process. The removed fiduciary was ordered by the court to pay a surcharge. He was also a beneficiary of the estate and was ordered to take a reduction in his share of the estate.
- In May 2020, Carmine successfully represented a client who was a trust beneficiary seeking to remove a trustee from the trust who neglected to perform the duties of a trustee. The Probate Court ruled in the client's favor finding the trustee, among other issues, had exposed the trust to potential financial loss, exhibited inconsistency in distribution criteria, and had a lack of regard for the beneficiary's privacy rights.
- In the above mentioned case from May 2020, the trustee used trust funds to pay for his attorney fees. As stated in a July 2021 decision, Carmine successfully argued that the removed trustee’s attorney’s fees and fiduciary fees, which were well into the six figures, should be his personal responsibility.
- In May 2019, Carmine successfully represented a client who was a trust beneficiary and the trustees were seeking to prevent the client from receiving what her parents intended pursuant to the trust. After a trial in Probate Court, the court ruled in the client’s favor.
- In a January 2019 decision, after many days of hearings, Carmine successfully represented a fiduciary who sought, and ultimately received, approval from a Probate Court regarding the fiduciary’s final accounting despite extensive objection from a beneficiary.
- In the Fall of 2018, Carmine successfully represented a client against her siblings who claimed that the client’s joint account with her parent should have been an asset of her parent’s estate. Despite her siblings various claims, the court, in its Memorandum of Decision, ruled that Carmine's client was the rightful owner of bank accounts previously in both her name and her parent’s name.
- In 2016, after a trial in Superior Court, Carmine successfully defended three siblings who were sued by a fourth sibling, claiming that their mother's wishes to assign property to the three siblings were made under duress and undue influence.
- In 2016, by way of Summary Judgment in the Superior Court, Carmine successfully defended a Connecticut resident who was sued by two family members for actions that he took prior to and during his appointment as executor of his mother's estate. The court accepted Carmine’s argument which saved his client from having to go to trial.
- After a three day trial in Superior Court, Carmine successfully defended an estate from a collateral attack initiated by disgruntled family members seeking to impose a constructive trust on the estate's primary asset, a piece of real estate in Fairfield, CT.
- In a May 2016 decision (J.Vacchelli), in the case of HealthCare Visions Inc. v. Martha Conn, the Superior Court denied the nursing facility’s attempt to remove each and every one of our client’s defenses and our client’s countersuit against the nursing facility.
- After an evidentiary hearing, Carmine successfully defended a Responsible Party against a nursing facility that was seeking to attach $180,000 of her assets in connection with an outstanding nursing facility debt of her mother's. After denial of a Medicaid application made by the facility on the resident's behalf, the facility sought to impose liability upon our client, the Responsible Party, but the court denied the facility's application for attachment.
- Carmine represented an elderly client who claimed she was financially exploited by prior powers of attorney. The Superior Court issued a favorable decision which resulted in a settlement that resolved the litigation between the client and the defendants.
- A family was hit with a large Medicaid penalty period due to some gifts that were made along with an outstanding nursing facility bill for $180,000. Carmine fought and won having the penalty period removed and the nursing home bill reduced to nearly nothing.
- In 2017, Carmine argued before the Connecticut Supreme Court, the Connecticut Appellate Court, and throughout the State at the trial court and Probate Court levels.
- Since 2012, Carmine has been an active member of the Probate Court Rules Advisory Committee, Sub-Committee II (focuses on Contested Hearings). A notable accomplishment while serving on this committee is that Carmine has played a role in writing the latest Connecticut Probate Court Rules of Procedure (updated through 2015).
- From 2014-2019 named New England elder law “Rising Star” by New England Super Lawyers Magazine, a designation recognizing the top up-and-coming attorneys in New England who are 40 years old or younger.
- Named a "Super Lawyer" by Super Lawyers Magazine, 2020, 2021, 2022
- JD, Quinnipiac University School of Law, 2005
- BS, Philosophy, Sacred Heart University, 2002
- Fairfield County “40 under 40” competition recipient for his legal accomplishments
- Recently helped draft the updated Court Appointed Attorneys in Court of Probate Manual
- Expanded his representation to include individuals from across the U.S. and overseas, including Australia.
Carmine is frequently sought out by other legal professionals. His in-depth knowledge has been illustrated in articles and presentations for the CT Bar Journal, the CT Bar Association, the CT Chapter of NAELA and the CT Trial Lawyers Association. Featured topics have included:
- contested conservatorships
- nursing facility resident rights
- responsible party liability
- limitation of spousal liability in nursing facilities
- how elder law attorneys should deal with nursing facilities
Carmine loves research, writing and oral argument. He also appreciates the opportunity to represent clients in matters that affect their lives. When he’s not in the office or fighting in court for our clients, Carmine enjoys spending time with his wife and two sons, running, or cycling.Professional & Bar Association Memberships
- CT Chapter of NAELA, Member, 2012-present
- Connecticut Bar Association
- Elder Law Section - Chairman: Member Since 2010
- Executive Committee, Estates & Probate Section: Member Since 2014
- Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL) Task Force: Member Since 2018
- Vice Chair of the Senior Lawyers Committee: Since 2019
- UPL Committee: Member Since 2019
- CT Trial Lawyers Association, Member, 2013-present
- CBA Estates & Probate Integrity of the Practice Committee, Member, 2014-present
- NAELA Consumer Protection Committee, Member, 2015-present
- The Valliere Decision: The Probate Court Order Survives DSS' Attack (published in the NAELA Practice Update)
- Recent Developments in Elder Law - Selected Cases and Legislation (published in the Connecticut Bar Journal)
- Elder Law Litigation: Nursing Facility Collection Actions
- Long-term Care Facilities: Are you being treated right?
- Probate Court Rules of Procedure: New Rules for Hearings (published in the Connecticut Bar Journal)
- The One Thing You Should Know About Nursing Home Evictions
- When NonLawyers Participate in Medicaid Planning Activities
- The DSS Decision to Ignore a Probate Court Decree Regarding Spousal Support
- Simonsen v. Bremby: Transfers between Trusts, the Federal Courts Weigh In