Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-20 (2026)

Comptroller may withhold school money

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 10-20 is repealed.

(1949 Rev., S. 1359; 1963, P.A. 361.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2022 · leading case: Embalmers' Supply Co. v. Giannitti, 929 A.2d 729 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Embalmers' Supply Co. v. Giannitti, 929 A.2d 729 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “On September 4, 2002, the law firm filed a motion requesting dismissal of the case because the plaintiff's complaint, as amended, did not comply with the pleading requirements of General Statutes § 52-91 and Practice Book § 10-20. On October 21, 2002, the court, Adams, J.”

Sturm v. Harb Dev., LLC, 2 A.3d 859 (Conn. 2010). “2d 17 (2009); Practice Book § 10-20 (complaint “shall contain a concise statement of the facts constituting the cause of action”).”

Raynor v. Hickock Realty Corp., 763 A.2d 54 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000). “Practice Book [§ 10-20]; see also Practice Book [§ 10-6]; General Statutes § 52-91; 1 Stephenson, Conn.”

Colon v. State, 19 A.3d 699 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 9× “The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the operative complaint on the grounds that its contents failed to comply with either Practice Book § 10-20 3 or General Statutes § 52-91 4 because the demand for relief failed *63 to specify the amount sought and the ad damnum clause was…”

Sullivan v. Lazzari, 43 A.3d 750 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012). “” Practice Book § 10-20 states in relevant *843 part that a complaint “shall contain a concise statement of the facts constituting the cause of action .”

Costello & McCormack, P.C. v. Manero, 194 Conn. App. 417 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). “to be divided into paragraphs numbered consecutively, each containing as nearly as may be a separate allegation,’’ as required by Practice Book § 10-1, nor does it contain a demand for relief of any kind, in contravention of Practice Book § 10-20. To the extent that Fetscher…”

AC Consulting, LLC v. Alexion Pharm., Inc. (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). “We are not persuaded that this allegation, with- out more, satisfied the plaintiff’s pleading obligations with respect to its breach of contract claim.”

LPP Mortg. Ltd. v. Underwood Towers Ltd. Partnertship (Conn. App. Ct. 2021). “70, § 10-20 (B).) In view of the court’s decision that the salary provided to Scobie violated the second mortgage itself, it is unnecessary to consider these additional prohibitions on distributions.”

O'Donnell v. Axa Equitable Life Ins. Co. (Conn. App. Ct. 2022). “’’ 7 Practice Book § 10-20 provides: ‘‘The first pleading on the part of the plaintiff shall be known as the complaint.”

Mangan, Tr. v. People's United Bank, N.A. (Bankr. D. Conn. 2020). “Therefore, the language in the Consent 12 While not dispositive in the present case, Connecticut Practice Book Section 10-20 and Conn. Gen. Stat. Section 52-91 provide two examples of the general principal that legal damages must be pled with particularity.”

Norton v. Town of South Windsor (Bankr. D. Conn. 2020). “See Connecticut Practice Book § 10-20, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-91 (a party seeking legal relief must state the specific amount sought in the complaint).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.