Case Name: LILLIE E. DICKERMAN vs. LOMAS NETTLETON CO., TRUSTEE, ET AL.
Court: Connecticut Superior Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1935-03-28
Citations: 1 Conn. Supp. 144
Docket Number: File #46416
Parties: LILLIE E. DICKERMAN vs. LOMAS NETTLETON CO., TRUSTEE, ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Supplement
Volume: 1
Pages: 144–145

Head Matter:
LILLIE E. DICKERMAN vs. LOMAS NETTLETON CO., TRUSTEE, ET AL.
Superior Court New Haven County
File #46416
Present: Hon. FREDERICK M. PEASLEY, Judge.
H. L. Dickerman, Attorney for the Plaintiff.
Clark, Hall & Peck, Attorneys for the Defendant.
MEMORANDUM FILED MARCH 28, 1935.

Opinion:
PEASLEY, J.
The answer in this case is voluminous and in some paragraph violates the rule against the pleading of evidential matters, but threaded through the whole of the nineteen paragraphs a proper, legal defense can be discerned. The motion to expunge would in this case, if granted, perform the function of a demurrer, and it has been repeatedly held that it can not be made to serve that purpose.
The motion to expunge is therefore denied.