(April 26, 2016, 10:04 AM EDT) -- HARTFORD, Conn. — A Connecticut Appellate Court panel on April 12 affirmed dismissal of a medical malpractice lawsuit against a neurologist and denial of the plaintiffs’ motion to amend the return process date of their complaint, with the panel finding that the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with statutory service of process and return date requirements prevented them from seeking relief under the state’s usual public policy favoring amendment (Charles Prenderville, et al. v. Christopher Sinclair, et al., No. AC 36931, Conn. App.; 2016 Conn. App. LEXIS 143)....