Pitchell v. City of Hartford

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Pitchell v. City of Hartford

704 A.2d 803, 243 Conn. 953, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 505

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedDecember 2, 1997

DocketSC 15835

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 704 A.2d 803 (Pitchell v. City of Hartford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pitchell v. City of Hartford, 704 A.2d 803, 243 Conn. 953, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 505 (Colo. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 46 Conn. App. 799 (AC 16267), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly hold that the appearance of the attorney for the city of Hartford on behalf of the defendant police officer did not waive the employee’s right to claim insufficient service of process by way of a motion to dismiss after judgment enters against him for failure to appear? See Practice Book §§ 142 and 144.”

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

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 46 Conn. App. 799 (AC 16267), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly hold that the appearance of the attorney for the city of Hartford on behalf of the defendant police officer did not waive the employee’s right to claim insufficient service of process by way of a motion to dismiss after judgment enters against him for failure to appear? See Practice Book §§ 142 and 144.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

704 A.2d 803, 243 Conn. 953, 1997 Conn. LEXIS 505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitchell-v-city-of-hartford-conn-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack