Portela v. Viera, No. 0104807 (Mar. 11, 1992)
Opinion of the Court
The defendant moves to dismiss on the ground of insufficient service of process.
The defendant has submitted an affidavit of Brian Festa, an employee of the defendant's employer. No affidavit or memorandum was filed to the contrary. According to Festa, the employer's records indicate that as of April 2, 1991 the defendant no longer lived at 56 Aetna Street. There is no opposing affidavits or brief. Therefore, there was no service which complied with General Statutes Section 52-34 (allowing service by leaving copy at "usual place of abode.")
Pursuant to the provisions of General Statutes Section
The defendant argues, however, that service cannot be made pursuant to Section
Motor vehicle is defined as "any vehicle propelled or drawn by any nonmuscular power, except . . . special mobile equipment as defined in subsection (i) of section
a vehicle not designed for the transportation of persons or property upon a highway and only incidentally operated or moved over a highway, including but not limited to . . . road construction and maintenance machinery such as asphalt spreaders, bituminous mixes, bucket loaders, tractors other than truck tractors, ditchers, burling graders, finishing machines, motor graders, road rollers, scarifiers, earth moving carry-alls and scrapers, power shovels and drag lines and self-propelled cranes and earth moving equipment. Id. (emphasis added)
The vehicle in question is not a motor vehicle but instead is special mobile equipment. Accordingly, process could not be effectuated pursuant to Section
FRANK S. MEADOW, JUDGE
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.