Dickerman v. Lomas Nettleton Co.
1 Conn. Supp. 144, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 61
Opinion
The answer in this case is voluminous and in some paragraph violates the rule against the pleading of evidential matters, but threaded through the whole of the nineteen paragraphs a proper, legal defense can be discerned. The motion to expunge would in this case, if granted, perform the function of a demurrer, and it has been repeatedly held that it can not be made to serve that purpose.
The motion to expunge is therefore denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dickerman v. Lomas Nettleton Co., 1 Conn. Supp. 144, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 61 (Colo. Ct. App. 1935).
1 Conn. Supp. 144 (Dickerman v. Lomas Nettleton Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.