Legal Opinion
Housing Authority v. Olesen
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided May 18, 1993No. 11046PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
The plaintiff housing authority1 appeals from the judgment in favor of the defendants2 in this summary process action based on the defendants’ failure to pay their April, 1988 rent. The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly (1) construed the plaintiff’s duty under federal law to inspect for lead-based paint, and (2) applied General Statutes § 47a-4a to the facts of this case. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
In November, 1986, the plaintiff and the defendants entered into an automatically renewable month-to-month written lease for an apartment in East Hartford. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Turner v. TurnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Connelly v. Housing Authority of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Kinney v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Doe v. MansonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Furstein v. HillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. PeelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Gore v. People's Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Sharp v. Wyatt, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- State v. NixonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Ingels v. SaldanaConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.