Coley v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co.

6 Conn. Super. Ct. 75
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedMarch 28, 1938
DocketFile No. 55058
StatusPublished

This text of 6 Conn. Super. Ct. 75 (Coley v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co.) 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
Coley v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co., 6 Conn. Super. Ct. 75 (Colo. Ct. App. 1938).

Opinion

It is well settled that the motion to expunge shall not be employed to test the merits of a pleading or any of the matter in a pleading which purports to state a cause of action or ground of defense. The sufficiency or materiality of the allegations of the paragraphs of the complaint mentioned in the instant motion, and the portion of another, may, of course, be determined on demurrer filed. Failing that, objection may be made on the trial to any evidence offered in support of them on the ground of their immateriality to the cause pleaded or the relief sought.

Motion denied.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 Conn. Super. Ct. 75, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coley-v-bridgeport-hydraulic-co-connsuperct-1938.