Barbie H. Drazen 1988 Trust v. Sullivan, No. 29 05 86 (Mar. 15, 1991)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 2513
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided March 15, 1991·No. No. 29 05 86·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE (No. 109) The complaint sufficiently raises the issue of establishing a lost or uncertain boundary which comes within the purview of47-34. Whether or not section "c" would take it out of 47-34 is impossible to determine based upon the pleadings. In order to make this determination, the court would require additional evidence which can be established through motion for summary judgment (if there is no evidential dispute) or in a plenary proceedings on the merits. Merely a demand for a committee does not entitle the plaintiff to the appointment of one. See Fogg v. Wakelee, 40 Conn. Sup. 272 (1983).

In any case, the prayer for relief is not limited to a remedy pursuant to 47-34.

Accordingly, the motion to strike is denied.

Robert I. Berdon, Judge.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Barbie H. Drazen 1988 Trust v. Sullivan, No. 29 05 86 (Mar. 15, 1991), 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 2513 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 2513 (Barbie H. Drazen 1988 Trust v. Sullivan, No. 29 05 86 (Mar. 15, 1991)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fogg v. Wakelee
492 A.2d 843 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1983)