Legal Opinion
Cummings & Lockwood v. Gray
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided December 24, 1991No. 10029PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHeiman, J.
The defendants appeal from the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on both the complaint and the defendants’ counterclaim.
The defendants assert that the trial court improperly granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on (1) the complaint because of the defendants’ failure to answer the plaintiff’s requests for admissions despite the defendants’ claim that they did not receive the requests, and (2) on the defendants’ counterclaim even though the subject matter of the requests for admissions was not material to the counterclaim. We affirm the trial court’s summary…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United Oil Co. v. Urban Redevelopment CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- Connell v. ColwellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Batick v. SeymourSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Strada v. Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- D.H.R. Construction Co. v. DonnellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- S.M.S. Textile Mills, Inc. v. Brown, Jacobson, Tillinghast, Lahan & King, P.C.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Bassin v. City of StamfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Miller v. BourgoinConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Town of Farmington v. DowlingConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Howard v. RobertsonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.