Legal Opinion

Burger v. Frohlich

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided August 7, 1967No. File No. CV 1-676-25421PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtWise, J.

The defendant, appearing specially, filed a plea in abatement “that the Court has no jurisdiction of this action because the Plaintiff failed to insert in his Writ, Summons and Complaint the last known address of the Defendant, as required by Section 868 of the Connecticut Practice Book, and for the further reason that the Sheriff’s return, although indicating that service was made at the usual place of abode of the Defendant, fails to indicate where the Writ, Summons and Complaint was left, in violation of Section 52-54 of the General Statutes of the State of Connecticut as amended; and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1962
  2. Clegg v. BishopSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
  3. Clover v. UrbanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
  4. Cugno v. KaelinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
  5. Budd v. Meriden Electric RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Sinoway Family Partnership v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Superior Court · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API