Summary
denying a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction where the motion was filed more than thirty days after the defendant's appearance
Summary of this case from Leddy v. CampbellOpinion
(11439)
Argued April 1, 1993
Decision released April 27, 1993
Action to recover damages for the alleged wrongful termination of the plaintiff's employment, and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Haven at Meriden, where the court, D. Dorsey, J., granted the defendant's motion to dismiss and rendered judgment thereon, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Reversed; further proceedings.
George J. Bradford, for the appellant (plaintiff).
David A. Dee, for the appellee (defendant).
This is an appeal from the trial court's granting of the defendant's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. The record shows that the defendant's appearance was filed on February 19, 1992, and the motion to dismiss was filed on March 31, 1992. The motion to dismiss was filed more than thirty days after the filing of the defendant's appearance. Under Practice Book 142 and 144, the objection to personal jurisdiction is waived if a motion to dismiss is not filed within thirty days of the filing of an appearance.
Practice Book 142 provides: "Any defendant, wishing to contest the court's jurisdiction, may do so even after having entered a general appearance, but must do so by filing a motion to dismiss within thirty days of the filing of an appearance. Except in summary process matters, the motion shall be placed on the short calendar to be held not less than fifteen days following the filing of the motion, unless the court otherwise directs."
Practice Book 144 provides: "Any claim of lack of jurisdiction over the person or improper venue or insufficiency of process or insufficiency of service of process is waived if not raised by a motion to dismiss filed in the sequence provided in Secs. 112 and 113 and within the time provided by Sec. 142."