Home/Connecticut Superior Court/Barton v. Shea

Barton v. Shea

4 Conn. Super. Ct. 278
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedOctober 27, 1936
DocketFile No. 50908
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 4 Conn. Super. Ct. 278 (Barton v. Shea) 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
Barton v. Shea, 4 Conn. Super. Ct. 278 (Colo. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

The defendant has pleaded in abatement because of the admitted failure of the plaintiff to fully comply with General Statutes Section 5619 in regard to the filing of a bond. The plaintiff seeks permission to amend to cure this formal defect. It would doubtless be within the power of the legislature to dispense with this formality but until it does the recognizance or certificate of financial responsibility is a condition precedent to the validity of the writ and the defect is not amendable.

Morse vs. Rankin, 51 Conn. 326; Harris vs. Harris GansCo., 3 Conn. Sup. 434.

Motion denied.

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

Related

Honan v. Burton, No. 30 23 91 (Apr. 7, 1993)
1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 3350 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1993)
Steinkamp v. Jacque
410 A.2d 489 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Conn. Super. Ct. 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barton-v-shea-connsuperct-1936.