Hydro Air of Connecticut, Inc. v. Versa Technologies, Inc.
District Court, D. Connecticut
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON MOTION OF POWER DRAULICS-NIELSEN, INC. TO AMEND COUNTERCLAIM
EGINTON, District Judge.
In its initial answer, the defendant Power Draulics-Nielsen, Inc. (“PDN”) set forth a counterclaim alleging that the instant action was filed vexatiously by Hydro-Air of Connecticut, Inc. (“Hydro Air”). PDN now seeks to add two additional counterclaims. One of these new counterclaims, labelled the “Second Counterclaim” in the proposed amended answer, alleges that a related case filed in New Jersey was also vexatious. The remaining proposed counterclaim, la-belled the “Third Counterclaim” in the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Schaefer v. O. K. Tool Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Sonnichsen v. StreeterConnecticut Appellate Court · 1967
- Paint Products Co. v. Minwax Co., Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1978
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kaltman-Glasel v. DooleyDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2001
- Equality, Inc. v. I-Link CommunicationsDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1999
- Calfee v. UsmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Pinsky v. DuncanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Pinsky v. DuncanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.