Jacobs v. Shore, No. Cv 139935 (Aug. 28, 1995)

Connecticut Superior Court

Jacobs v. Shore, No. Cv 139935 (Aug. 28, 1995)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 9312

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedAugust 28, 1995

DocketNos. CV 139935, CV 139935S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 9312 (Jacobs v. Shore, No. Cv 139935 (Aug. 28, 1995)) 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

Jacobs v. Shore, No. Cv 139935 (Aug. 28, 1995), 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 9312 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (#140) The defendants' motion for partial summary judgment as to counts six, seven and eight of the plaintiff's complaint, is denied. Much of the documentary evidence provided by the parties is improper in that it fails to comply with the requirements of Practice Book §§ 380 and 381. Furthermore, genuine issues of material fact exists as to whether construction on the property of the defendants will adversely affect the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his property; and whether an implied easement exists as alleged by the plaintiff. See Perkins v. Fasig, Supreme Court, judicial district of Danbury, Docket No. 310981 (March 3, 1994, Moraghan, J.).

KARAZIN, J.

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (#140) The defendants' motion for partial summary judgment as to counts six, seven and eight of the plaintiff's complaint, is denied. Much of the documentary evidence provided by the parties is improper in that it fails to comply with the requirements of Practice Book §§ 380 and 381. Furthermore, genuine issues of material fact exists as to whether construction on the property of the defendants will adversely affect the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his property; and whether an implied easement exists as alleged by the plaintiff. See Perkins v. Fasig, Supreme Court, judicial district of Danbury, Docket No. 310981 (March 3, 1994, Moraghan, J.).

KARAZIN, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 9312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacobs-v-shore-no-cv-139935-aug-28-1995-connsuperct-1995.