Legal Opinion
Lakitsch v. Brand
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 27, 1923PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCubtis, J.
The reasons of appeal allege as errors the rulings of the court as to the substituted complaint, the amended substituted complaint, and the second amended substituted complaint.
When each amended or substituted complaint was filed, it took the place of the complaint for which it was substituted, and that dropped out of the case. “It remained on the files, and constituted part of the history of the cause, but could furnish no basis for a future judgment; nor could any previous ruling upon it be made a subject of appeal.” Goodrich v. Stanton, 71 Conn. 418, 424, 42 Atl. 74. The voluntary filing…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Coram v. DavisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Goodrich v. StantonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Boland v. O'neil, Admr.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Brown v. FalesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Eames v. MayoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Rossignol v. Danbury School of Aeronautics, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
- Osborne v. Locke Steel Chain Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
- Connecticut Union of Telephone Workers, Inc. v. Southern New England Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Antman v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Ives v. City of WillimanticSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.