Longley v. Suffield Academy, No. Cv01 0809999 S (Oct. 15, 2002)

Connecticut Superior Court

Longley v. Suffield Academy, No. Cv01 0809999 S (Oct. 15, 2002)

2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 13172

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedOctober 15, 2002

DocketNo. CV01 0809999 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 13172 (Longley v. Suffield Academy, No. Cv01 0809999 S (Oct. 15, 2002)) 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

Longley v. Suffield Academy, No. Cv01 0809999 S (Oct. 15, 2002), 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 13172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

RULING ON MOTION TO STRIKE (#114) Motion granted as to Count One. The conduct alleged does not rise to the level of intolerable and exceeding all bounds of civilized decency. See Appleton v. Board of Education, 254 Conn. 205 (2000).

Motion granted as to Count Two. No tortious conduct in the actual termination is alleged. Perodeau v. Hartford, 259 Conn. 729 (2002).

Motion granted as to Count Eight. No explicit statutory, constitutional or judicially conceived violation of public policy has been alleged.Thibodeau v. Design Group One Architects, 260 Conn. 691, 699 (2002).

Motion to strike Count Ten granted. No criminal or unlawful act or means is alleged. Williams v. Maislen, 116 Conn. 433 (1933).

____________, J. Beach CT Page 13173

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