Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Citation
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Parent Document
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1983-12-06
Other Sections in This Document (67)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
- Southland Corp. v. Vernon, 473 A.2d 318 (1983)
Full Text
729 charspreceded this case, the defendant argues that the reasoning behind that rule requires its application here. We disagree. The rule, which is not one of unbending rigor or universal application; id., 113; is based on the notion that “ ‘there cannot be any reason or necessity for bringing the second [action], and, therefore, it must be oppressive and vexatious.’ ” Id., 112. Here the subsequent counterclaim was filed in response to the defendant’s separate action for injunctive relief and damages, and the plaintiff’s separate action was obviously filed as a response to the uncertainty of whether this action would survive. Under these circumstances we do not see the retention of this action as either oppressive or vexatious.