Connecticut Superior Court, 1940

Mansfield Sons Co. v. Pausch

Mansfield Sons Co. v. Pausch
Connecticut Superior Court · Decided July 16, 1940 · QUINLAN, J.
8 Conn. Super. Ct. 402

Counsel

Watrous, Hewitt, Gumbart Corbin, of New Haven, for the Plaintiff. Slade, Slade Slade, of New Haven, for the Defendants.

Mansfield Sons Co. v. Pausch

Opinion of the Court

The demurrer to a lone paragraph, viz., paragraph 6, which does not of itself attempt to state a cause of action, is improperly pleaded. Practice Book (1934) § 97.

So far as the demurrer to the prayer for relief is concerned, the more specific statement in conjunction with paragraph 6 adequately states a cause upon which such relief could be predicated. See, however, form 249 in connection with form 250, Practice Book (1934) pp. 215, 216.

In its present form, as to subdivision I of the demurrer, and at the present time, in view of such allegations as do appear as to subdivision II, the demurrer is overruled.

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