The mission of the Connecticut Judicial Branch is to serve the interests of justice and the public by resolving matters brought before it in a fair, timely, efficient and open manner.

Landlord/Tenant Law Supreme and Appellate Court Opinions

by Zigadto, Janet

 

July 2015 - July 2016 (reverse chronological order)

AC37174 - Elliott Enterprises, LLC v. Goodale (Summary process; equitable nonforfeiture; "In this summary process action, the defendant tenants . . . appeal from the judgment of the trial court in which the court found that the defendants had violated their lease agreement (lease) and granted possession of the leased premises to the plaintiff landlord . . . The trial court rendered judgment of possession in favor of the plaintiff on the ground that the defendants had failed to pay sewer charges and late fees due under the lease. On appeal, the defendants claim that the trial court erred by failing to consider that they had overpaid the plaintiff real estate taxes, which were a component of the rent pursuant to the lease, in an amount greater than what the plaintiff claimed they owed for the sewer charges and late fees. The defendants also claim that the trial court erred in determining that they had failed to prove the defense of equitable nonforfeiture. We reverse the judgment of the trial court.")

AC36966 - Housing Authority v. Weitz ("In this summary process action, the defendant . . . appeals from the judgment of immediate possession rendered by the trial court in favor of the plaintiff . . . after she was defaulted for failure to appear at trial. The defendant claims on appeal that the trial court erred in ‘ordering a default judgment for failure of the defendant to appear at trial where the defendant appeared by counsel, counsel requested a continuance, and when the continuance was denied, [counsel] stated he was ready to proceed on trial, no motion was made for default, counsel indicated that the defendant was not personally present due to illness, and the court had already indicated that the case would have to be sent to Stamford for scheduling a trial.’ We reverse the judgment of the trial court.")

AC36954 - Pollansky v. Pollansky ("This appeal is the latest skirmish in the ongoing dispute between the plaintiff, Steven Pollansky, and his mother, the defendant Anna Pollansky, concerning the plaintiff's claim of entitlement to real property allegedly promised to him by his father, Andrew Pollansky, many years ago. Anna Pollansky previously had initiated a summary process action against the plaintiff and his family seeking immediate possession of three parcels of property located in Coventry, which they occupied. The plaintiff's primary claim in the summary process action, raised by way of special defense, was that he occupied the Coventry property pursuant to an ownership interest that was orally promised to him by Andrew Pollansky. After a trial, the court in the summary process action rendered judgment in favor of Anna Pollansky, and this court affirmed that judgment. See Pollansky v. Pollansky, 144 Conn. App. 188, 71 A.3d 1267 (2013). . . . We reverse the judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendants on the plaintiff's counts of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. We affirm the judgment in all other respects.")

AC37213 - 136 Field Point Circle Holding Co., LLC v. Razinski ("The issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred when it rendered a judgment of possession for the plaintiff . . . in a summary process action without first conducting the hearing prescribed by General Statutes § 47a-26b (d). We conclude that the court erred and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the court.


The defendants . . . appeal from the judgment of possession. On appeal, they claim that the judgment was ultra vires because rendering it violated § 47a-26b (d). The plaintiff responds that the self-executing provision of § 47a-26b(d) did not apply at the phase of the proceedings in which the court rendered a judgment of possession. The plaintiff also claims that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the appeal because it is moot. We agree with the defendants.")

AC37396 - Kenosia Commons, Inc. v. DaCosta ("The plaintiff, Kenosia Commons, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendants, Cynthia DaCosta and Candra DaCosta, in this summary process action. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly concluded that by virtue of Cynthia DaCosta’s ownership of shares of stock in the plaintiff corporation she is not subject to summary process proceedings pursuant to General Statutes § 21-80. We reverse the judgment of the trial court.")

AC36519 - Lee v. Stanziale (In this landlord-tenant case, the defendant . . . appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding the plaintiff . . . a total of $18,122.50 in attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to General Statutes § 52-251a. The defendant contends that the court abused its discretion in so doing. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

AC36458 - Success, Inc. v. Curcio ("In this summary process action, the defendants Gus Curcio, Jr., and Theresa Smyers appeal following the trial court’s denial of their motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and the rendering of judgment of immediate possession of premises located in Stratford in favor of the plaintiff, Success, Inc. The defendants claim that the court erred in: (1) denying their motion to dismiss and finding that the plaintiff had standing as the legal owner of the property to pursue its summary process action, (2) improperly rendering judgment of immediate possession in favor of the plaintiff because Curcio, Jr., is the beneficial owner of the property, and (3) improperly failing to impose a constructive trust in favor of the defendants. We agree with the defendants that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently prove legal ownership of the premises and, as a result, lacked standing to initiate the summary process action. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the court and remand this case with direction to dismiss the plaintiff’s action.")

AC35834 - Southhaven Associates, LLC v. McMerlin, LLC (Breach of commercial lease agreement; "The defendant Francis G. Linn, guarantor of a commercial lease agreement, appeals from the judgment of the trial court in favor of the plaintiff landlord . . . in this action brought against the defendant tenant and the defendant guarantors of the lease. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred in its factual findings with regard to his special defense of failure to mitigate damages and in its calculation of damages. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")