In Yeske v. Avon Old Farms School, Inc., 1 Conn. App. 195, 205, 470 A.2d 705 (1984), counsel commented during rebuttal argument about the appearance of the defendant's counsel, the size of his firm, the position of his counsel table and the type of clients he represented. Id., 204 n.8. He also suggested that his opponent would lie and resort to trickery to win his case. Id. The Court characterized such remarks as "tasteless," "flagrantly prejudicial" and "far beyond the boundaries of legitimate comments made during the heat of forensic warfare," and concluded that "no curative instruction by the court could remedy their maliciousness." Id., 203-204.