From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Research Associates v. New Haven Redevelopment Agency

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Oct 23, 1968
248 A.2d 927 (Conn. 1968)

Summary

In Research Associates, Inc. v. New Haven Redevelopment Agency, 157 Conn. 587, 588-589 (1968), the court said: "The burden rests on the plaintiff to allege a recognizable cause of action and it is not sufficient that a complaint refer to a basis of liability by some distinctive name"... a complaint thus is demurrable if the plaintiff does not meet its requirement "to set forth facts upon the basis of which, if true, he (she) may be able to establish in law a right to relief...."

Summary of this case from Taylor v. College

Opinion

Argued October 1, 1968

Decided October 23, 1968

Action for the reconveyance of property taken for redevelopment purposes, and for damages, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County, where a demurrer to the substituted complaint was sustained and a motion to expunge was granted, McGrath, J., and, the plaintiff failing to plead further, judgment was rendered for the defendant, from which the plaintiff appealed. No error.

Benjamin M. Chapnick, for the appellant (plaintiff).

George C. Hastings, with whom was Alan R. Spier, for the appellee (defendant).


This appeal is taken from a judgment rendered following the sustaining of a demurrer to three counts of a substituted complaint purporting to assert causes of action for breach of a promise, fraud, and illegal exercise of statutory authority. Prior litigation between the parties arising from the same events is reported in 153 Conn. 118, 214 A.2d 375, and 152 Conn. 137, 204 A.2d 833.

The record discloses several preliminary procedural irregularities, but the basic and controlling question is whether the court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the three counts of the substituted complaint. We conclude that it did not and that the demurrer was well taken. The burden rests on the plaintiff to allege a recognizable cause of action, and it is not sufficient that a complaint refer to a basis of liability by some distinctive name. Lombardi v. J. A. Bergren Dairy Farms, Inc., 153 Conn. 19, 22, 213 A.2d 449; Anderson v. Colwell, 93 Conn. 61, 65, 104 A. 242. A demurrer does not admit legal conclusions; McAdam v. Sheldon, 153 Conn. 278, 282, 216 A.2d 193; and, in any action, the complainant is required to set forth facts upon the basis of which, if true, he may be able to establish in law a right to relief, for, unless that is done, the pleading is demurrable. Rossignol v. Danbury School of Aeronautics, Inc., 154 Conn. 549, 558, 227 A.2d 418.


Summaries of

Research Associates v. New Haven Redevelopment Agency

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Oct 23, 1968
248 A.2d 927 (Conn. 1968)

In Research Associates, Inc. v. New Haven Redevelopment Agency, 157 Conn. 587, 588-589 (1968), the court said: "The burden rests on the plaintiff to allege a recognizable cause of action and it is not sufficient that a complaint refer to a basis of liability by some distinctive name"... a complaint thus is demurrable if the plaintiff does not meet its requirement "to set forth facts upon the basis of which, if true, he (she) may be able to establish in law a right to relief...."

Summary of this case from Taylor v. College
Case details for

Research Associates v. New Haven Redevelopment Agency

Case Details

Full title:RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. v. NEW HAVEN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Oct 23, 1968

Citations

248 A.2d 927 (Conn. 1968)
248 A.2d 927

Citing Cases

Finnucane v. Dandio

"The burden rests on the plaintiff to allege a recognizable cause of action, and it is not sufficient that a…

Verdon v. Transamerica Ins. Co.

Although a motion to strike admits facts well pleaded; State v. LeSelva, 163 Conn. 229, 231, 303 A.2d 721…