Carstarphen v. Schweitzer
This text of 8 Conn. Super. Ct. 28 (Carstarphen v. Schweitzer) 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.
Opinion
An examination of form 460, Practice Book (1934), indicates that the allegations of the present complaint are in compliance therewith. The matter sought to be made more specific pertains more to evidence than factual allegations, and as to that a knowledge of the situation resides necessarily with both parties to the action. The degree of the alleged obstruction is immaterial so far as an injunction is concerned, and when it comes to damages, if any, the evidence will be determinative.
I do not read the allegation of threatened continuance in any other light than the alleged obstructing, being of a continuing nature, is indicative of a threat to continue.
The motion is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Conn. Super. Ct. 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carstarphen-v-schweitzer-connsuperct-1940.