Home/Connecticut Superior Court/Martin v. Veronneau, No. 106771 (Feb. 10, 1994)

Martin v. Veronneau, No. 106771 (Feb. 10, 1994)

1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 1438
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedFebruary 10, 1994
DocketNo. 106771
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 1438 (Martin v. Veronneau, No. 106771 (Feb. 10, 1994)) 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
Martin v. Veronneau, No. 106771 (Feb. 10, 1994), 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 1438 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION The defendant, Marcel Veronneau, has moved the court to order the plaintiffs to amend their complaint and cite in Moffo Trucking for apportionment under General Statutes 52-102 and52-572h. Under the circumstances of this case, it is proper to deny the motion to cite in made pursuant to General Statutes52-102. Bulley v. Tettlebaum, 8 CSCR 996 (October 11, 1993, Higgins, J.). If the defendant wishes to bring Moffo Trucking into the case, it may move to implead under General Statutes52-102a and Practice Book 117. See Bulley, 8 CSCR at 996.

Accordingly, the motion to cite in is denied.

/s/ McDonald, J. McDONALD

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

Related

Bulley v. Tettelbaum, No. 64090 (Sep. 7, 1993)
1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 8096 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 1438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-veronneau-no-106771-feb-10-1994-connsuperct-1994.