Harris v. Griffing
Connecticut Superior Court
1Opinion of the CourtKing, J.
The plaintiff filed a demurrer to the second and third special defenses of the defendants’ answer. In a memorandum of decision, the demurrer, on December 15, 1953, was overruled as to the second special defense but sustained as to the third special defense. The defendants have made no .attempt to amend their answer or otherwise plead ■over. Wooster v. Jerome, 131 Conn. 266, 268. The question now is, basically, what the next step should be. This is precipitated by the plaintiff’s motion for default for failure to plead over after demurrer sustained to third special defense. See Wooster v.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Automotive Twins, Inc. v. KleinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- Antman v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Guarnaccia v. WiecenskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- Eames v. MayoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Wooster v. JeromeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Beach v. KorffConnecticut Superior Court · 1963
- Commonwealth v. Holliday, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Somerset County1975
- M-A-C Loan Plan, Inc. v. SchabelConnecticut Appellate Court · 1969