DocketNumber: No. CV96 0150977 S
Citation Numbers: 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 4589
Judges: D'ANDREA, J.
Filed Date: 4/9/1998
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/17/2021
"Facts showing the service of process in time, form, and manner sufficient to satisfy the requirements of mandatory statutes in that regard are essential to jurisdiction over the person." (Emphasis in the original; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bridgeport v. Debek,
"The motion to dismiss shall be used to assert . . . insufficiency of service of process. This motion shall always be filed with a supporting memorandum of law, and where appropriate, with supporting affidavits as to facts not apparent on the record." Practice Book § 143, now Practice Book (1998 Rev.) §
General Statutes §
The defendant argues that service was not made to the defendant's "last known address." However, no affidavits have been submitted by the defendant to show what was his last known address. Rather, the defendant attaches a copy of an uncertified land record indicating the sale of 6 May Drive, Norwalk, Connecticut, by the defendant to a third party. This is not evidence that the defendant no longer resides at 6 May Drive. And, this is not proof that the defendant's last known address was not 6 May Drive, Norwalk, Connecticut.
The sheriff's return indicates that mail service was made to the defendant's last known address, 6 May Drive. Process was also hand delivered to the secretary of state. The court has nothing before it which would indicate that the plaintiff did not satisfy the statutory notice requirements. Therefore, the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied.
So Ordered.
D'ANDREA, J.