`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`ORDER 435704
`
`O'CONNELL, DOUGLAS K, SUCCESSOR
`ADMINISTRATOR OF T
` V.
`CALDWELL, DANIEL J, FORMER
`ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ES Et Al
`
`JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD
` AT TORRINGTON
`
`6/4/2018
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDER REGARDING:
`05/29/2018 140.00 REQUEST
`
`The foregoing, having been considered by the Court, is hereby:
`
`ORDER: DENIED
`
`This motion is denied without prejudice. When issues of fact pertaining to a motion to dismiss are in
`dispute, the court must hold an evidentiary hearing. Schaghticoke Tribal Nation v. Harrison, 264 Conn.
`829, 833 (2003); Standard Tallow Corp. v. Jowdy, 190 Conn. 48, 56 (1983); Bartlett v. Metropolitan
`District Commission, 125 Conn. App. 149, 155-56 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 913 (2011); Weihing
`v. Dodsworth, 100 Conn. App. 29, 38 (2007). This request, however, provides no argument as to why
`issues of fact relevant to the motion to dismiss are in dispute. Therefore, the request is denied without
`prejudice to being reclaimed if the requester provides a persuasive argument as why pertinent facts are
`in dispute.
`
`Judicial Notice (JDNO) was sent regarding this order.
`
`435704
`
`Judge: JOHN DAVID MOORE
`
`LLICV176016067S 6/4/2018
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
