Murphy v. Soracco

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Murphy v. Soracco

373 A.2d 1209, 173 Conn. 756

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Murphy v. Soracco. Read the opinion of the Court — 174 Conn. 165 →

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided June 7, 1977·Published

Opinion

It appearing that the defendant in the above-entitled case has failed to defend against the named plaintiff’s appeal from the Superior Court in Fair-field County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that unless the defendant files his brief on or before June 10, 1977, the judgment be set aside and the case be remanded with direction to render judgment for the named plaintiff.

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

It appearing that the defendant in the above-entitled case has failed to defend against the named plaintiff’s appeal from the Superior Court in Fair-field County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that unless the defendant files his brief on or before June 10, 1977, the judgment be set aside and the case be remanded with direction to render judgment for the named plaintiff.

Murphy v. Soracco, 373 A.2d 1209, 173 Conn. 756 (Colo. 1977).

Pincite

373 A.2d 1209 (Murphy v. Soracco) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.