Lee v. Shainess, No. Cv 93 52593 S (Nov. 18, 1993)

Connecticut Superior Court

Lee v. Shainess, No. Cv 93 52593 S (Nov. 18, 1993)

1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 10036

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided November 18, 1993·No. No. CV 93 52593 S·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: MOTION TO STRIKE The plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Counterclaim is granted for the following reasons:

1. The counterclaim does not have a prayer for relief. Carchidi v. Roden Hiser, 209 Conn. 526, 531 (1989).

CT Page 10037

2. The defendant did not file an objection and serve memorandum of law. (C.P.B. 155), (nor did the defendant appear at the hearing).

Klaczak, 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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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 TO STRIKE The plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Counterclaim is granted for the following reasons:

1. The counterclaim does not have a prayer for relief. Carchidi v. Roden Hiser, 209 Conn. 526, 531 (1989).

CT Page 10037

2. The defendant did not file an objection and serve memorandum of law. (C.P.B. 155), (nor did the defendant appear at the hearing).

Klaczak, J.

Lee v. Shainess, No. Cv 93 52593 S (Nov. 18, 1993), 1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 10036 (Colo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 10036 (Lee v. Shainess, No. Cv 93 52593 S (Nov. 18, 1993)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related