In Gurliacci v. Mayer, 218 Conn. 531, 590 A.2d 914 (1991) a motion to dismiss was utilized to challenge the sufficiency of the pleadings. The Court adopted the rule that "absent exceptional circumstances, a denial of a motion for summary judgment is not appealable where a full trial on the merits produces a verdict against the moving party." Id. The court stated that "the fact that the plaintiff's complaint failed to allege facts that would have removed it from the operation of . . . immunity . . . merely reflects that the complaint failed to state a legally sufficient cause of action." Id., 544. Because the challenge was to the legal sufficiency of the complaint, the court held that the motion to dismiss was improper. Id. The court concluded that "the plaintiff's complaint was within the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction, albeit subject to a motion to strike for failure to state a legally sufficient claim . . . ." Id., 545.