History
  • No items yet
midpage
Canteen v. Day, No. 30 20 15 (Feb. 20, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 1566
| Conn. Super. Ct. | 1991
|
Check Treatment

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANTS DAYS' OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORIES (No. 108) 1. Objections to interrogatories 4, 5, 6, 14, 15, 16 (except for reasons leaving each school), 18, 19, 25, 25a, 30, 30(a), 31, and 32 are overruled.

2. Objection to production 3 is overruled and defendants shall produce to the extent provided by the rules.

3. Objection to production 4 is sustained without prejudice. If there are such statements, plaintiffs may renew their request and show requisite need.

4. Interrogatories 16 (part), 17, 20, 20(a), 21, 21(a), 22, 23, 24, 27a, 28a and 29a and production 1 and 2 certainly involve information which would be admissible or which is reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. The defendants Days merely objected on the basis that it was not relevant or that it is privileged under the practice book. Nevertheless, since this information involves the 13 year old defendant Lynell Evans, and since disclosure of this information may be precluded or regulated by statute and since counsel who represents Lynell Evans was not present in court since the discovery request was directed to counsel for the Evanses, the court will not take action on these objections until counsel for Lynell Evans can also be heard.

ROBERT I. BERDON, Judge CT Page 1567

Case Details

Case Name: Canteen v. Day, No. 30 20 15 (Feb. 20, 1991)
Court Name: Connecticut Superior Court
Date Published: Feb 20, 1991
Citation: 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 1566
Docket Number: No. 30 20 15
Court Abbreviation: Conn. Super. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.