Segar v. Lounsbury

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Segar v. Lounsbury

205 A.2d 200, 152 Conn. 733

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 1, 1964·Published

Opinion

It appearing that the defendants in the above-entitled case have failed to prosecute their appeal from the Superior Court in Tolland County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court of Errors, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed.

Argued December 1 decided December 1, 1964 Donald P. Chernoff, for the appellants (defendants).

The defendants filed a motion for reargument which was granted.

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

It appearing that the defendants in the above-entitled case have failed to prosecute their appeal from the Superior Court in Tolland County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court of Errors, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed.

Argued December 1 decided December 1, 1964 Donald P. Chernoff, for the appellants (defendants).

The defendants filed a motion for reargument which was granted.

Segar v. Lounsbury, 205 A.2d 200, 152 Conn. 733 (Colo. 1964).

Pincite

205 A.2d 200 (Segar v. Lounsbury) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.