Kenney v. Blakeslee
3 Conn. Supp. 447, 1936 Conn. Super. LEXIS 68
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Kenney v. Blakeslee. Read the opinion of the Court — 3 Conn. Super. Ct. 193 →
Opinion
The Plea in Abatement is sustained on the authority of Mattoon’s Appeal, 79 Conn. 86. While this may not be in keeping, in principle, with cases permitting the joinder of parties as defendants to prevent a multiplicity of suits, it must be remembered that this is purely a statutory proceeding, and as long as the statute remains the same, the reasoning in the Mattoon case will have to be followed.
The Plea in Abatement is therefore sustained and the appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kenney v. Blakeslee, 3 Conn. Supp. 447, 1936 Conn. Super. LEXIS 68 (Colo. Ct. App. 1936).
3 Conn. Supp. 447 (Kenney v. Blakeslee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mattoon's Appeal
63 A. 784 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1906)