Hesse v. Town of Vernon, No. Cv 97 64546 S (Dec. 24, 1997)
Opinion of the Court
The defendant has moved to dismiss the action on the grounds that the plaintiff has not provided it with a recognizance for costs as required by Connecticut Practice Book § 52 and Connecticut General Statutes §
Where no recognizance appears the writ is defective and subject to a Motion to Dismiss. §
This defect is, however, curable. Marciano v. Piel,
Accordingly, the plaintiff may cure this defect by filing an appropriate recognizance on or before January 23, 1998. If she does so, the Motion to Dismiss shall be denied. If she does not do so, the Motion to Dismiss shall be granted.
Klaczak
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.