Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Conn. Cir. Ct. 324

Rivera v. Hankard

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided October 18, 1963

Connecticut Appellate Court · decided 1963-10-18

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 1968

2 state decisions

Relies on Lamberti v. City of Stamford · Springfield-Dewitt Gardens, Inc. v. Wood

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1963-10-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1In the trial court, the defendant had filed a motion to expunge twelve of eighteen paragraphs of the plaintiffs’ complaint because they were “irrelevant, immaterial and evidential.” Prom a denial of the motion the defendant has appealed. The motion to dismiss is on two grounds: (1) The appeal was not taken timely, and (2) the action appealed from was not a final judgment. The motion *325to expunge was decided on June 19, 1963, and the appeal taken on July 3. The appeal taken was within the period of two weeks limited by the rules. Cir. Ct. Rule 7.5.1; Lamberti v. Stamford, 131 Conn. 396, 398. A decision denying a motion to expunge is not a final action dispositive of all or part of the issues between the parties and may not be treated as a final judgment for purposes of appeal. See Cir. Ct. Rule 7.51.1; Practice Book, 1951, §§ 377, 380; Springfield-Dewitt Gardens, Inc. v. Wood, 143 Conn. 708, 709 n.

¶2The motion to dismiss is granted on the second ground.

¶3In this opinion Kosicki, Deaeington and Levine, Js., concurred.

/2/conncirct/324 · .json · Public domain