DocketNumber: No. 114793
Citation Numbers: 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 8204
Judges: SYLVESTER, J.
Filed Date: 8/15/1994
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
The defendant filed an answer and six special defenses which were revised in response to the plaintiff's request to revise. The plaintiff then simultaneously filed a reply to the first, third, fourth, and fifth special defenses and a motion to strike the second and sixth special defenses. The defendant has objected only to the motion to strike the second special defense and at oral argument conceded to the granting of the motion to strike the sixth special defense.
A motion to strike may be used to challenge the legal sufficiency of a special defense. Practice Book § 152(5); see Krasnow v. Christensen,
As noted above, the plaintiff simultaneously filed a motion to strike the second and sixth special defenses and a reply to the remaining special defenses.
Practice Book 112, which provides for the order of pleadings after the complaint has been filed, specifically provides that the plaintiff's motion to strike a defendant's answer [including any special defenses] shall be filed before the plaintiff's reply to any special defenses. A party which files the pleadings in the inverse order is deemed to have waived the filing of the motion to strike. Practice Book 113.
(Footnotes omitted.) Daley v. Gaitor,
"The very words of § 113, `when the court does not otherwise order' indicate, however, that the court has discretion to allow the filing of pleadings out of order." Sabino v.Ruffolo,
In the present case, because the plaintiff only replied to several of the defendant's special defenses, and simultaneously moved to strike the remaining special defenses not addressed by the reply, the court exercises its discretion to overlook the simultaneous filing of the pleadings and address the merits of the motion to strike. Sabino v. Ruffolo, supra, CT Page 8206
The defendant's second special defense alleges that the decedent did not have authority to sign the guaranty for the corporations and that the decedent did not receive any consideration for the execution of the document. The plaintiff, in the motion to strike, argues only that the "[t]he defendant was an individual and the special defenses of ultra vires does not apply." The plaintiff's motion, however, does not address the allegation of failure of consideration in the special defenses. If a count in a complaint or a defense thereto purports to set out more than one cause of action or defense, a motion to strike addressed to the entire count or defense will fail if it does not reach all causes of action or defenses pleaded. Watchelv. Rosol,
As noted above, at oral argument, the defendant conceded to the granting of the motion to strike the sixth special defense. Accordingly, the court grants the motion to strike the sixth special defense.
/s/ Sylvester, J. SYLVESTER