ACHILLES v. CLARK, No. CV97 0159731 (Sep. 9, 1997)


WILLIAM ACHILLES, ET AL vs KAREN CLARK, ET AL

1997 Ct. Sup. 9257
No. CV97 0159731Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford
September 9, 1997

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: MOTION TO STRIKE (#102)

HICKEY, J.

The defendants have chosen an improper vehicle by which to assert this claim. “The grounds which may bed asserted in a motion to dismiss are: (1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; (2) lack of jurisdiction over the person; (3) improper venue; (4) insufficiency of process; and (5) insufficiency of service of process.” Zizka v. Water Pollution Control Authority, 195 Conn. 682, 687, 490 A.2d 509 (1985), citing Practice Book § 143. The defendants’ motion to dismiss (#102) as to plaintiff Achilles is

HICKEY, J.