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

Connecticut Superior Court

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

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 2513

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1991

DocketNo. 29 05 86

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 2513 (Barbie H. Drazen 1988 Trust v. Sullivan, No. 29 05 86 (Mar. 15, 1991)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 2513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barbie-h-drazen-1988-trust-v-sullivan-no-29-05-86-mar-15-1991-connsuperct-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack