Hyde v. Cox

8 Conn. Super. Ct. 400
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided June 18, 1940·No. File No. 58608·Published

Opinion

If a decision on this demurrer is to be of any value it should, as a matter of record, clearly define the questions of law sought to be raised.

In its present condition of attack on specific paragraphs it fails to meet the requirements of the Practice Book (1934) § 97, and of form No. 347. Also, see, Hill vs. Fair Haven Westville R.R. Co., 75 Conn. 177; Smith Co. vs. HurlburtCo., 93 id. 391.

Moreover if the complaint sets forth a cause of action in the first count, whatever the terminology used, it should be permitted to go to trial. Folwell vs. Howell, 117 Conn. 565.See, also, Shirlock vs. Macdonald, 121 id. 611.

The demurrer is returned without decision.

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

Hyde v. Cox, 8 Conn. Super. Ct. 400 (Colo. Ct. App. 1940).

8 Conn. Super. Ct. 400 (Hyde v. Cox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Folwell v. Howell
169 A. 199 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1933)
Hill v. Fair Haven & Westville Railroad
52 A. 725 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1902)