`
`: SUPERIOR COURT
`
`JOLLY JOHN’S TRUCK &
`
`: JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WINDHAM
`
`EQUIPMENT, LLC
`
`VS.
`
`: AT PUTNAM
`
`RICHARD CHENEY
`
`: SEPTEMBER 23, 2020
`
`The undersigned respectfully represents:
`
`Motion to Cite in Parg Defendant
`
`1. The plaintiff brought suit against Richard Cheney seeking payment for rental equipment
`used by the defendant.
`
`2. This matter was scheduled for trial and at that time, the defendant, Richard Cheney, stated
`that he had rented the equipment as agent for Mattem Construction Inc. and that Mattem
`Construction would be a necessary party to this action. After that court date, we attempted
`to resolve the matter without success.
`
`3. Since the matter could not be resolved amicably, Mattem Construction, Inc. is a necessary
`party with regard to any trial of this matter.
`
`WHEREFORE, the undersigned moves that the plaintiff’s complaint be amended to state the facts
`showing the interests of Mattem Construction, Inc. in this action and that the corporation be
`summoned to appear as a co-defendant.
`
`THE PLAINTIFF
`
` Mark R. Brouillard
`
`St. Onge & Brouillard
`Their Attorney
`
`NEITHER ORAL ARGUMENT NOR TESTIMONY REQUESTED
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION
`
`I hereby certify that on the 23rd day of September, 2020, a copy of the foregoing was
`mailed, postage prepaid, to the following self—represented party as follows:
`
`Mr. Richard Cheney
`42 Oak Drive
`
`Mansfield, CT 06250
`
`
`
`Mark R. Brouillard
`
`Commissioner 0fthe Superio Court
`
`
`
`
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
