The plaintiffs contend that, in denying the plaintiffs the relief sought, the court failed to consider the claim that the defendant's by-laws violate Connecticut General Statutes §
"A party seeking injunctive relief has the burden of alleging and CT Page 9208 proving irreparable harm and lack of an adequate remedy at law. . . . A prayer for injunctive relief is addressed to the sound discretion of the court." Tighe v. Berlin,
General Statutes §
The by-laws of the defendant3 set out the requirements for membership, beginning with article VI, section 1, entitled "Qualifications and Classifications of Membership." "Membership requirements will be selective and only those persons who are economically solvent, possess good character and integrity and will be socially compatible with the existing members of the Club will be accepted." (Article VI, section 1.) Each applicant for admission must fill out the application, and submit three letters of recommendation from current members. (Article VI, section 7, ¶ 1.) Applicants are then voted on by the board of governors, and are then elected to probationary membership. (Article VI, section 7, ¶ 3.) "During the probationary period, the Probationary Member shall be entitled to all Club privileges, but shall not have the right to vote or hold office. . . . At the last meeting of the Board of Governors prior to the Annual Meeting, the Probationary Members may be elected into regular Membership. . . ." CT Page 9209 (Emphasis added.) (Article VI, section 8, ¶ 2-3.)
These by-laws appear to be "reasonable and germane to the purposes of the corporation". However, whether they are "equally enforced" is not clear. The court requires evidence on this issue. Therefore, the parties are ordered to appear on Monday, August 12, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., for a hearing on the matter.
GALLAGHER, J.
