Connecticut Superior Court, 1940

Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. Goldberg

Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. Goldberg
Connecticut Superior Court · Decided June 5, 1940 · Cornell
8 Conn. Super. Ct. 354; 8 Conn. Supp. 354; 1940 Conn. Super. LEXIS 124

Counsel

Dennis T. O'Brien, Jr., of Meriden, for the Plaintiff. A. Robert Levett, of New Haven, for the Defendant.

Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. Goldberg

Opinion of the Court

CORNELL, J.

The special defense, in reality, pleads four-defenses. In order that a demurrer addressed to it may be sus' tainable to the entire defense, it is necessary, of course, that it reach all of the defenses which it contains. That on file does not purport to do this, since nothing in it purports, nor could’ it accomplish a destruction of that pleaded in paragraph 4 which is merely a denial of liability.

It was available to the plaintiff to have demurred to each-paragraph of the special defense which purports to state a. separate defense or any number of paragraphs which taken to' gether do so (Practice Book [1934] §97), and in this way to-have eliminated any of such defenses which might be vulnerable to such a pleading.

As the demurrer on file, however, is addressed to the entire-special defense and cannot possibly reach the denial in para' graph 4 which — improperly or not — is a part of the defense, it necessarily follows that if granted it would be impotent to-destroy that pleading in its entirety, which latter is its objective..

It must in consequence, be, and it is overruled.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.