Legal Opinion

Opticare Centers v. Aaron, No. 0111491 (Feb. 24, 1994)

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided February 24, 1994No. 0111491Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION "The motion to strike is the proper vehicle to challenge the legal sufficiency of any answer to any complaint, counterclaim or cross-claim, or any part of that answer including any special defense contained therein . . ." Practice Book 152. In passing on a motion to strike . . . we must take the facts alleged favorably to the pleader and view those facts in a broad fashion, not strictly limited to the allegations, but also including the facts necessarily implied by and fairly probable under…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Morris v. Hartford Courant Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
  2. Blancato v. Feldspar Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  3. Meredith v. Police Commission of the Town of New CanaanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  4. Springfield-Dewitt Gardens, Inc. v. WoodSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
  5. Charles Holdings, Ltd. v. Planning & Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API