Karpinski v. Shw, Inc., No. Cv 97 65367 S (Feb. 6, 1998)
Opinion of the Court
General Statutes §
The most liberal interpretation of the statute, so as to favor the here objecting party, would be that the thirty day period would commence to run the day following the service of the complaint. Were that to be the case the motion to intervene dated December 3, 1997 would be within "thirty days after such notification". Any shortening of the thirty day period in which to intervene in a pending action is certainly not what the legislature intended. Further, the complaint was not returned to court until Nov. 12, 1997, and would not be a pending action until that date. Until then there would be no pending action in which to intervene. A plaintiff could theoretically thwart intervention by giving notice after service but more than 30 days CT Page 1460 prior to the return of process. Connecticut General Statutes §§
The motion of Clean Harbors, Inc. To intervene is GRANTED. The objection to the motion to intervene is OVERRULED.
L. Paul Sullivan, J.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.