Legal Opinion

Chomko v. Patmon

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided October 24, 1989No. 7581PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.

This appeal is a sequel to our recent decision in Chomko v. Patmon, 19 Conn. App. 483, 563 A.2d 311 (1989) (Chomko I). In Chomko I, which was a summary process action based on nonpayment of rent, we found no error in the trial court’s determination that the plaintiff had failed to establish a landlord-tenant relationship between him and the defendants regarding the condominium in question, and that, therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to a judgment of possession by way of a summary process action. The basis of our decision was the abundant evidence, on which the trial court was entitled…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Halpern v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  2. Salem Park, Inc. v. Town of SalemSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
  3. Chomko v. PatmonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Carnese v. MiddletonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
  2. Gagnon v. Planning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
  3. Tucker v. Pace Investments AssociatesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
  4. State v. SinclairConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
  5. Housatonic Corporate Centre Associates Ltd. v. Planning & Zoning BoardConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API