Legal Opinion

Charsky v. McKesson & Robbins, Inc.

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided March 3, 1936No. File #49740PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtCornell, J.

The petition contains allegations of a-11 of the essentialities necessary to the granting of the prayer contained in it.

Among these is the following:

“5. The time within which your petitioner is required under the laws of this state and the rules of this court to answer or plead to the complaint in the above entitled action has not yet expired.”

The writ in the instant cause was made returnable to, and returned to, this court on the first Tuesday of February, viz., February 4, 1936.

According to the opinion in Security Co. vs. Pratt, et al, 65 Conn. 161, 178, a petition for removal must be filed…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Security Co. v. PrattSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Linahan v. LinahanConnecticut Superior Court · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API