Motion to Dismiss

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF [________________________________] AT [________________________________]

Docket No.: [________________________________]

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

IMPORTANT CONNECTICUT-SPECIFIC NOTE: Connecticut civil procedure uses both a Motion to Dismiss and a Motion to Strike, which serve different functions. The Motion to Dismiss (Conn. P.B. § 10-30) is used to challenge jurisdiction (subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and sufficiency of process/service) — not the legal sufficiency of the pleading. To challenge the legal sufficiency of the complaint (equivalent to a federal Rule 12(b)(6) motion), a defendant files a Motion to Strike under Conn. P.B. § 10-39. Both are addressed in this template.

PART ONE: MOTION TO DISMISS

MOTION TO DISMISS

Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book § 10-30, Defendant [________________________________] ("Defendant") hereby moves to dismiss the Complaint of Plaintiff [________________________________] ("Plaintiff") on the following grounds:

GROUNDS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS

(Pursuant to Conn. P.B. § 10-30(a), which currently enumerates only the four grounds below — a motion to dismiss under Connecticut practice does NOT include "improper venue," "failure to state a claim," or a general catch-all "other grounds" category)

Defendant moves to dismiss on the following grounds (check all that apply):

☐ Ground 1 – Lack of Jurisdiction Over Subject Matter [P.B. § 10-30(a)(1)]
This Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action because [________________________________].

☐ Ground 2 – Lack of Jurisdiction Over Person [P.B. § 10-30(a)(2)]
This Court lacks jurisdiction over the person of Defendant because [________________________________]. Defendant is a non-resident/foreign entity without sufficient contacts with Connecticut to satisfy due process requirements.

☐ Ground 3 – Insufficiency of Process [P.B. § 10-30(a)(3)]
The process served upon Defendant is insufficient because [________________________________].

☐ Ground 4 – Insufficiency of Service of Process [P.B. § 10-30(a)(4)]
Service of process upon Defendant was insufficient because [________________________________].

IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING WAIVER: Under Conn. P.B. § 10-32, a defendant waives the right to contest personal jurisdiction and sufficiency of process/service by failing to raise them in a Motion to Dismiss filed within 30 days of filing an appearance, as required by P.B. § 10-30(b). Subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time and cannot be waived. P.B. § 10-33.

IMPROPER VENUE — NOT A § 10-30(a) GROUND: Connecticut's venue statute (C.G.S. § 51-345) governs where an action must be returned. Venue objections are addressed through the venue statute itself and, where a case has already been returned to the wrong judicial district, through a Motion to Transfer under C.G.S. § 51-347b — not through a Practice Book § 10-30 Motion to Dismiss. Counsel who believe venue is improper should evaluate a Motion to Transfer as a separate filing.

PRIOR PENDING ACTION — NOT A § 10-30(a) GROUND: Connecticut case law recognizes the "prior pending action" doctrine (a discretionary, equitable basis for a court to decline to entertain a second action between the same parties over the same subject matter) as a distinct common-law basis on which a court may act, but it is not one of the four grounds textually enumerated in P.B. § 10-30(a). Counsel relying on this doctrine should brief it separately with a properly researched, currently valid citation rather than citing it as a numbered § 10-30(a) subsection.

PART TWO: ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO STRIKE

MOTION TO STRIKE

(Conn. P.B. § 10-39 — equivalent to Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim)

Note: The Motion to Strike under Connecticut Practice Book § 10-39 is the mechanism for challenging the legal sufficiency of a pleading — including whether the complaint states legally sufficient claims. It is the Connecticut equivalent of a federal Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. This section should be filed together with or in lieu of Part One if the basis for challenge is legal sufficiency, not jurisdiction.

Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book § 10-39, Defendant [________________________________] hereby moves to strike the following portions of Plaintiff's Complaint on the grounds that they are legally insufficient:

☐ The entire Complaint, on the ground that it fails to state a legally sufficient cause of action against Defendant.

☐ Counts [____] through [____] of the Complaint, on the grounds stated below.

☐ Specific allegations in the Complaint, including: [________________________________].

GROUNDS FOR MOTION TO STRIKE

Count [____]: [Name of Claim]

☐ This count is legally insufficient because [________________________________].
☐ This count is legally insufficient in that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because Plaintiff has not alleged [________________________________].
☐ This count is legally insufficient because it is based upon a theory of liability that is not recognized under Connecticut law: [________________________________].

Count [____]: [Name of Claim]

☐ This count is legally insufficient because [________________________________].

[Special Defense / Request for Relief / Other Pleading to be Stricken]:

☐ The request for [________________________________] is legally insufficient because [________________________________].

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. On or about [__/__/____], Plaintiff commenced this action by service of process upon Defendant in the Judicial District of [________________________________].

2. The Complaint was filed with the Court on [__/__/____].

3. Defendant filed its Appearance on [__/__/____].

4. Under Conn. P.B. § 10-30(b), a Motion to Dismiss must be filed within 30 days of filing an appearance, or the defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction and insufficiency of process/service are waived under P.B. § 10-32. (Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is never waived and may be raised at any time.)

5. This Motion is timely filed on [__/__/____], within 30 days of Defendant's Appearance filed on [__/__/____].

6. Under Conn. P.B. § 10-6, the response periods in Connecticut civil litigation are governed by the Practice Book. The defendant must respond to the complaint within the time set by statute or Practice Book rule. A Motion to Dismiss or Motion to Strike is a proper first response.

7. [Additional relevant procedural history:]
   [________________________________]

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

I. INTRODUCTION

[Provide a concise statement of the basis for this Motion.]

[________________________________]
[________________________________]

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A. Motion to Dismiss — Jurisdictional Defects (Conn. P.B. § 10-30)

A motion to dismiss in Connecticut is the proper vehicle to assert the grounds currently enumerated in Practice Book § 10-30(a): (1) lack of subject matter jurisdiction, (2) lack of personal jurisdiction, (3) insufficiency of process, and (4) insufficiency of service of process. See Conn. P.B. § 10-30(a) (2026 ed.); see also Fraiszyn v. Browning, 276 Conn. 198, 202 (2005) (describing the historical, broader set of grounds; counsel should confirm the current rule text before relying on older case-law recitations, since the Practice Book has since narrowed the enumerated grounds and no longer lists venue as a subsection of § 10-30(a)).

Subject Matter Jurisdiction: A challenge to subject matter jurisdiction implicates the court's fundamental authority to hear a case and may be raised at any time, even on appeal. Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Dep't of Education, 303 Conn. 402, 413 (2012). When subject matter jurisdiction is challenged, the court may consider evidence outside the pleadings to resolve the jurisdictional issue.

Personal Jurisdiction: When personal jurisdiction is challenged, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating sufficient facts to establish that the court has jurisdiction over the defendant. Connecticut's long-arm statute for nonresident individuals, foreign partnerships, and voluntary associations, C.G.S. § 52-59b, authorizes jurisdiction over non-residents who transact business in Connecticut, commit tortious acts in Connecticut, or maintain certain other contacts with the state; foreign corporations are separately reached through C.G.S. § 33-929(f). Thomason v. Chemical Bank, 234 Conn. 281, 286 (1995).

Oral Argument: Under Conn. P.B. § 11-18(a), oral argument on a motion to dismiss is a matter of right — but it is not automatic. It is preserved only if the motion is marked "ready" per the short-calendar procedure, or if a nonmoving party files and serves a written notice of intent to argue on or before the third day before the short calendar date. A party that fails to do either can waive the right to argue. See Conn. P.B. § 11-18(a)-(d).

B. Motion to Strike — Legal Insufficiency (Conn. P.B. § 10-39)

A motion to strike tests the legal sufficiency of a pleading. Larobina v. McDonald, 274 Conn. 394, 400 (2005). The court admits all well-pleaded facts and draws all reasonable inferences in the pleader's favor. Faulkner v. United Technologies Corp., 240 Conn. 576, 580 (1997).

Connecticut is a fact pleading jurisdiction under Conn. P.B. § 10-1, which requires "a plain and concise statement of the material facts on which the pleader relies" — a stricter standard than federal notice pleading. However, "legal conclusions" are not deemed admitted by a motion to strike — only well-pleaded facts. Mingachos v. CBS, Inc., 196 Conn. 91, 108 (1985).

Unlike a federal Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a Motion to Strike in Connecticut attacks the legal sufficiency of the pleading, not whether the claim is plausible. The relevant question is whether the plaintiff has alleged legally cognizable claims — not the probability or plausibility of ultimate success. Doe v. Yale University, 252 Conn. 641, 665 (2000).

A motion to strike is filed after a motion to dismiss has been decided (or if there are no jurisdictional grounds to raise). Under Conn. P.B. § 10-6, the sequencing of pleadings matters: a defendant who files a motion to dismiss does not waive the right to file a motion to strike after the motion to dismiss is decided.

III. ARGUMENT

A. [SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION — complete if applicable]

This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because [________________________________].

The Superior Court has broad jurisdiction under C.G.S. § 51-164s, but that jurisdiction is subject to constitutional and statutory limitations. Specifically, [________________________________].

[Cite and apply applicable limiting statute or constitutional provision.] [Case citation].

Because this Court lacks the fundamental authority to hear this matter, the Motion to Dismiss must be granted on this ground, and the case dismissed pursuant to Conn. P.B. § 10-30(a)(1). This ground for dismissal may be raised at any time and cannot be waived.

B. [PERSONAL JURISDICTION — complete if applicable]

This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant under Connecticut's long-arm statutes because Defendant lacks sufficient minimum contacts with Connecticut.

Defendant is [a non-resident individual / a corporation incorporated in / an entity organized under the laws of] [________________________________] with its principal place of business in [________________________________]. (Note: C.G.S. § 52-59b applies to nonresident individuals, foreign partnerships, and foreign voluntary associations. A foreign corporation's amenability to suit is instead analyzed under C.G.S. § 33-929(f), which contains substantively similar transacting-business/tortious-act/property grounds.)

Under C.G.S. § 52-59b, a non-resident individual is subject to personal jurisdiction in Connecticut only if the non-resident:

• Transacts any business within the state;
• Commits a tortious act within the state (except as to a cause of action for defamation);
• Commits a tortious act outside the state causing injury to a person or property within the state if the tortfeasor regularly does or solicits business in Connecticut, derives substantial revenue from goods used in Connecticut, or expects the act to have consequences in Connecticut and derives substantial revenue from interstate commerce;
• Owns, uses, or possesses any real property situated within the state; or
• Uses a computer or computer network located in Connecticut.

None of these bases applies here:

1. Defendant does not transact business in Connecticut.
2. The acts giving rise to Plaintiff's claims occurred in [________________________________], not Connecticut.
3. Defendant does not own property in Connecticut.

Because neither specific nor general personal jurisdiction exists, the Motion to Dismiss must be granted under Conn. P.B. § 10-30(a)(2). International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945).

C. [IMPROPER VENUE — complete if applicable; NOTE: not a P.B. § 10-30(a) motion-to-dismiss ground — see below]

Venue is improper in the Judicial District of [________________________________]. Under C.G.S. § 51-345, venue for this type of action is proper in the Judicial District of [________________________________] because [________________________________].

Because improper venue is not one of the four grounds enumerated in Practice Book § 10-30(a), this action should be addressed through a Motion to Transfer under C.G.S. § 51-347b (or through the court's own authority to reassign venue), not through dismissal under P.B. § 10-30. (If filing a separate Motion to Transfer, adapt the request for relief accordingly rather than requesting dismissal.)

D. [INSUFFICIENCY OF PROCESS / SERVICE — complete if applicable]

Plaintiff failed to comply with Connecticut's service of process requirements under C.G.S. §§ 52-57 to 52-59. The deficiencies include:

☐ The writ of summons did not comply with C.G.S. § 52-45a in that [________________________________].

☐ Service was not made on a proper person. Under C.G.S. § 52-57(a), individual defendants must be served by in-hand or abode service. Plaintiff attempted service by [________________________________], which does not satisfy the statutory requirements because [________________________________].

☐ Service on a corporation/LLC/entity was not made in compliance with C.G.S. § 52-57(c) because [________________________________].

☐ Service was not completed within the required time period because [________________________________].

☐ Other: [________________________________].

Because proper service of process is a prerequisite to the Court's personal jurisdiction over Defendant, the Motion to Dismiss must be granted pursuant to Conn. P.B. § 10-30(a)(3) (insufficiency of process) and/or § 10-30(a)(4) (insufficiency of service of process).

E. [MOTION TO STRIKE — LEGAL INSUFFICIENCY — complete if applicable]

Count [____]: [Name of Cause of Action]

Connecticut requires that each count of a complaint allege the essential elements of the claim. Faulkner, 240 Conn. at 580. To state a claim for [cause of action] under Connecticut law, a plaintiff must plead: (1) [element]; (2) [element]; (3) [element]; and (4) [element]. [Citation], [____] Conn. [____] ([____]).

Plaintiff's Count [____] fails to allege legally sufficient facts because:

1. [Element missing or insufficiently pleaded]: Plaintiff alleges that "[quote from complaint]." This allegation is a legal conclusion, not a well-pleaded fact. Mingachos, 196 Conn. at 108. The Complaint contains no facts establishing [element].

2. [Missing element]: The Complaint fails to allege [________________________________], which is an essential element of [cause of action] under Connecticut law. [Citation].

3. [Theory not recognized]: The Complaint [appears to allege / relies upon] a theory of liability that is not recognized under Connecticut law because [________________________________]. [Citation].

[Repeat for each count challenged.]

F. [STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS — complete if applicable]

Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations under C.G.S. § [________________________________], which provides a [____]-year limitations period for [type of claim].

The face of the Complaint reveals that the cause of action accrued on [__/__/____] when [describe accrual event]. [Cite Connecticut accrual case]. The limitations period expired on [__/__/____]. Plaintiff did not commence this action until [__/__/____].

A motion to strike is appropriate where the complaint's own allegations demonstrate on their face that the claim is time-barred. [Cite Connecticut case supporting a face-of-the-complaint statute-of-limitations motion to strike — verify current authority before filing; e.g., search for the specific limitations period and accrual doctrine that applies to the cause of action pleaded].

IV. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. ☐ Grant the Motion to Dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction and/or insufficiency of process/service, and dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint;

2. ☐ Grant the Motion to Strike and strike the legally insufficient counts/claims from Plaintiff's Complaint;

3. ☐ Grant both motions as applicable;

4. Award Defendant its costs; and

5. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.

ORAL ARGUMENT

Oral argument on a Motion to Dismiss is a matter of right under Conn. P.B. § 11-18(a). However, this right is preserved only if the motion is marked "ready" per the short-calendar procedure, or a party files and serves written notice of intent to argue on or before the third day before the short calendar date, per Conn. P.B. § 11-18(a)(1)-(2). Failing to do so can waive the right to argue.

Estimated argument time: [____] minutes per side.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Defendant [________________________________] prays for an Order granting this Motion to Dismiss and/or Motion to Strike, dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint, and awarding Defendant its costs and such other relief as this Court deems appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: [__/__/____]

[________________________________]
[________________________________] (Juris No. [________________________________])
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________], Connecticut [____]
Telephone: ([____]) [____]-[____]
Facsimile: ([____]) [____]-[____]
Email: [________________________________]
Attorney for Defendant [________________________________]

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that a copy of the above was [hand delivered / mailed] on [__/__/____] to all counsel and pro se parties of record, as follows:

[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]

☐ Electronic Service via Connecticut e-filing system (eFiling.jud.ct.gov) — system will notify registered parties electronically.

☐ U.S. Mail, First Class, postage prepaid.

☐ Hand Delivery.

☐ Facsimile: ([____]) [____]-[____]

[________________________________]
[Commissioner of Superior Court / Attorney / Print Name]

FILING NOTES AND INSTRUCTIONS

Motion to Dismiss Deadline: A Motion to Dismiss challenging personal jurisdiction (P.B. § 10-30(a)(2)) or insufficiency of process/service (P.B. § 10-30(a)(3)/(4)) must be filed within 30 days after filing an Appearance (P.B. § 10-30(b)), or these defenses are waived. Conn. P.B. § 10-32.

Subject Matter Jurisdiction — Never Waived: A motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (P.B. § 10-30(a)(1)) may be filed at any time — even after the case has been tried. Conn. P.B. § 10-33.

Memorandum of Law Required: Under P.B. § 10-30(c), a Motion to Dismiss "shall always be filed with a supporting memorandum of law and, where appropriate, with supporting affidavits as to facts not apparent on the record."

Oral Argument — Matter of Right, but Not Automatic: Connecticut law makes oral argument on a Motion to Dismiss a matter of right under P.B. § 11-18(a) — but the right must be preserved by marking the motion "ready" or by filing a timely written notice of intent to argue; it is not scheduled automatically without action by a party.

Opposition Deadline: The opposing party has 30 days from the filing of the Motion to Dismiss to file an Objection. Conn. P.B. § 10-31(a).

Motion to Strike (Legal Sufficiency): To challenge the legal sufficiency of the complaint (failure to state a cause of action), use a Motion to Strike under Conn. P.B. § 10-39, not a Motion to Dismiss. These are distinct procedural vehicles in Connecticut.

Improper Venue and Prior Pending Action Are Not § 10-30(a) Grounds: Venue objections are governed by C.G.S. § 51-345 and, once a case has been returned to the wrong judicial district, are raised through a Motion to Transfer under C.G.S. § 51-347b — not a Motion to Dismiss. The "prior pending action" doctrine is a separate, discretionary common-law basis for a court to decline to entertain a duplicative action; it is not a numbered Practice Book § 10-30(a) subsection.

Sequencing of Pleadings: Under Conn. P.B. § 10-6, the Motion to Dismiss is the first responsive pleading a defendant may file; filing certain other pleadings first can waive the right to file a Motion to Dismiss (P.B. § 10-7). A defendant who files a Motion to Dismiss does not thereby waive the right to later file a Motion to Strike if the Motion to Dismiss is denied.

E-Filing: Connecticut courts require e-filing through the Connecticut Judicial Branch e-filing portal at https://efile.jud.ct.gov/.

Page Limits: The Connecticut Practice Book does not set statewide page limits for memoranda of law. However, individual judges may impose limits. A memorandum in support of a Motion to Dismiss is expected to be reasonable in length. Check the court's standing orders.

Waiver of Defenses: Certain defenses are waived if not timely raised. See P.B. § 10-32. Strategic sequencing of pleadings is critical in Connecticut practice.

Sources and References:

• Official 2026 Connecticut Practice Book: https://www.jud.ct.gov/publications/PracticeBook/PB.pdf
• Connecticut Judicial Branch: https://www.jud.ct.gov/
• Connecticut e-filing: https://efile.jud.ct.gov/
• Connecticut General Statutes: https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/titles.htm