Winiarski v. Heath, No. 334780 (Oct. 3, 1997)
This text of 1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 9961 (Winiarski v. Heath, No. 334780 (Oct. 3, 1997)) 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.
Opinion
The plaintiffs seek to file additional interrogatories, claiming that "the standard interrogatories provided in Practice Book Form 106.10A are inadequate or inappropriate in the instant action so that plaintiffs may file alternate request for production upon the defendants."
Practice Book § 223, para. 2, effective October 1, 1997, provides in relevant part: "In all personal injury actions alleging liability based on the operation or ownership of a motor vehicle oralleging liability based on the ownership, maintenance or controlof real property, the interrogatories served shall be limited to those set forth in Practice Book Forms 106.10A, 106.10B, and/or 106.10C, unless upon motion, the court determines that such interrogatories are inappropriate or inadequate in the particular action." (Emphasis added.)
The plaintiff does not point to anything in this "particular action" that renders the standard interrogatories "inappropriate or inadequate". To grant such motions as this, which cross the desks of superior court judges with ever-increasing frequency, would undermine Practice Book §§ 223, 227. "Either we adhere to the rules or we do not adhere to them." Osborne v. Osborne,
The motion (#120) to file alternate interrogatories is denied.
BY THE COURT
Bruce L. Levin Judge of the Superior Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 9961, 20 Conn. L. Rptr. 524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winiarski-v-heath-no-334780-oct-3-1997-connsuperct-1997.