DocketNumber: File 207450
Citation Numbers: 385 A.2d 686, 34 Conn. Super. Ct. 247, 34 Conn. Supp. 247, 1977 Conn. Super. LEXIS 182
Judges: Grillo
Filed Date: 6/28/1977
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
The plaintiff instituted an action against the defendants Wilkes and Dumais alleging injuries resulting from a collision involving the vehicles of both defendants. Wilkes, in addition to his answer, has set forth against the defendant Dumais a pleading entitled "cross complaint" seeking *Page 248
recovery of damages for damage to his vehicle. The parties concede that the pleading is a cross claim. The defendant Dumais has filed a special defense alleging that the "cross complaint was not brought within two years from the date of the accident and that the cause of action is therefore barred by §
Following the closing of pleadings in the present case, the defendant Dumais filed a motion for a summary judgment. Since Wilkes and Dumais are not in dispute as to the facts as *Page 249
set forth in Dumais' special defense, the only issue is one of law, that is, whether §
"The New York Code of Procedure as amended in 1850, for the first time, we believe, made use of the term ``counterclaim' as applied to matter which a defendant might plead for his protection against the plaintiff's demand. . . . This term has since been incorporated into all the code practice systems of the country. In most jurisdictions it is employed with the same comprehensive meaning that was first given to it in New York. . . . The term itself is a general and comprehensive one, naturally including within its meaning all manner of permissible counterdemands." Boothe v. Armstrong,
The word "counter" has been defined to mean "serving to answer . . . or challenge the action of another . . . ." As a prefix it has been defined as "opposing," "answering." See Webster, Third New International Dictionary. "Counterclaim" has been defined as "[a] claim which, if established, will defeat or in some way qualify the judgment or relief to which the plaintiff is otherwise entitled . . .; a counter demand or a cause of action existing in favor of the defendant against the plaintiff, on which the defendant might have secured *Page 250 affirmative relief had he sued the plaintiff in a separate action. . . ." Ballentine's Law Dictionary (3d Ed.).
Generally speaking, a counterclaim is a cause of action asserted by one or more defendants against one or more plaintiffs while a cross claim is asserted against one or more codefendants. Seligson v. ChaseManhattan Bank,
The action of the defendant Wilkes is affirmative and not in opposition to any litigant's position. It is initiatory. It does not oppose. It is not designed to protect him from a claim against him.
This court cannot extend §
The motion for summary judgment is granted.