Citation Numbers: 70 A. 1021, 81 Conn. 284, 1908 Conn. LEXIS 95
Judges: Baldwin, Hall, Prentice, Thayer, Roraback
Filed Date: 10/27/1908
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/3/2024
This demurrer involves two false assumptions, to wit: first, that the plaintiffs' allegations of time precluded them from proving that Mrs. Bulkley received her alleged injuries on some day later than that alleged; and second, that the statements of the officer in his return of service were to be accepted as facts coming within the purview of the demurrer to the complaint. *Page 286
The plaintiff's averment of the time when the events which furnished the basis of their cause of action occurred, was an immaterial one, and upon a trial proof that they occurred upon some subsequent day, which would render the demurrer pointless, would have been admissible.Fitzgerald v. Scovil Mfg. Co.,
The demurrer was to the complaint. We have held that a complaint may, for the purposes of a demurrer, be read in connection with the writ which it accompanies. Radezky v. Sargent Co.,
Section 1130 of the General Statutes, with which we are here concerned, is quite different in its character from § 2020 relating to actions against municipal corporations by reason of defective highways. The latter section gives a right of action where there would otherwise be none, and makes the giving of a prescribed notice a condition precedent to the existence of such a right under any and all circumstances.Crocker v. Hartford,
The court in its memorandum assigned another reason for its action in overruling the demurrer. We have no need to pass upon the sufficiency of this reason.
There is no error.
In this opinion the other judges concurred.
Radezky v. Sargent & Co. , 77 Conn. 110 ( 1904 )
Fitzgerald v. Scovil Manufacturing Co. , 77 Conn. 528 ( 1905 )
Lizotte v. Welker, No. 0365237 (Sep. 24, 1990) , 1990 Conn. Super. Ct. 1732 ( 1990 )
Savings Institute v. Conn. Fin. Net., No. Cv 93 530735 S (... , 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 9990 ( 1994 )
Sbalbi v. Eaton Corporation, No. Cv89 02 92 58s (Nov. 29, ... , 1990 Conn. Super. Ct. 4212 ( 1990 )
Schnabel v. Tyler, No. 0349210 (Sep. 17, 1990) , 1990 Conn. Super. Ct. 2023 ( 1990 )
Frederick v. Schrier Brothers, Inc., No. Cv93 30 28 60 S (... , 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 5454 ( 1994 )
Commissioner of Transportation v. Connemara Court , 46 Conn. Super. Ct. 623 ( 2000 )
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Lorson ( 2022 )
Verner v. Petrie, No. Cv89 029109 (Dec. 18, 1990) , 1990 Conn. Super. Ct. 4616 ( 1990 )
Tilo Co. v. Fishman , 164 Conn. 212 ( 1972 )
Southport Congregational Church-United Church of Christ v. ... ( 2016 )
Pope v. Santoro, No. Cv93 0520686 (Dec. 20, 1993) , 1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 11021 ( 1993 )
Coletti v. Connecticut Co. , 105 Conn. 94 ( 1926 )
Nicholaus v. City of Bridgeport , 117 Conn. 398 ( 1933 )
National Broadcasting Co. v. Rose , 24 Conn. Super. Ct. 459 ( 1963 )
Harris v. Housing Authority , 21 Conn. Super. Ct. 132 ( 1958 )
Holden v. Crown Chemical Corporation , 19 Conn. Super. Ct. 85 ( 1954 )
Sabo v. Automated Light Technologies, Inc., No. 110800 (May ... , 8 Conn. Super. Ct. 577 ( 1993 )
Cumberland Farms v. Groton, No. Cv 96-0539192 S (Jan. 19, ... , 29 Conn. L. Rptr. 144 ( 2001 )