2006 Ct. Sup. 22450, 42 CLR 477
No. CV 05-4011909.Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Hartford at Hartford.
December 1, 2006.
CORRECTED RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND APPEAL AND RULING ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
SAMUEL FREED, J.T.R.
In its ruling on November 7, 2006 on plaintiff’s motion to amend appeal this court wrote that the objection to the proposed amendment was sustained by Judge Bryant on February 3, 2006 when in fact the correct date was January 3, 2006.
To amplify on this, however, the court points out that this decision (Motion #112) sustained the defendant Lord’s objection to the motion for the reasons stated by this court on November 7, 2006. This ruling did not involve a ruling on the form of the motion, but on the merits of the motion as claimed by the defendant in its objection.
This court endorsed this decision by Judge Bryant in its memorandum of November 7, 2006 and reaffirms its ruling at this time in denying the motion to amend the appeal.
Plaintiff has filed a motion for reconsideration of its ruling of November 7, 2006. The court has considered the contents of the motion but again denies the motion to amend his appeal. CT Page 22451