Crogan v. Schiele
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action for an injury by reason of the negligence of the defendant; brought to the Superior Court. The first count of the complaint alleged that the defendant, on the 17th day of November, 1888, was the possessor and occupier of certain premises with the appurtenances situate in the city of New Haven, adjoining a certain public highway in said city known as Franklin street, and kept, maintained and permitted to remain on said premises, substantially adjoining sai^l public…
Read the full summary
Action for an injury by reason of the negligence of the defendant; brought to the Superior Court. The first count of the complaint alleged that the defendant, on the 17th day of November, 1888, was the possessor and occupier of certain premises with the appurtenances situate in the city of New Haven, adjoining a certain public highway in said city known as Franklin street, and kept, maintained and permitted to remain on said premises, substantially adjoining sai^l public highway and so near the public footway of said highway as to make the use of the same unsafe and dangerous, a deep area or…
1ConcurrencePark, C. J.
I concur in the foregoing opinion in all respects except in the view there presented of the effect of a demurrer overruled on the hearing in damages. I think the judge who wrote it has somewhat misapprehended the *208effect and extent of our decision in Crane v. The Eastern Transportation Line, 48 Conn., 361. I will briefly state my views upon the point.
A demurrer admits the truth of the alleged facts for the sole purpose of testing their legal sufficiency. If the demurrer is overruled, and the defendant answers over, the. admission cannot be used as evidence against him. It stands like any other…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Crane v. Eastern Transportation LineSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1880