Pander v. French
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtJacobs, J.
The parties occupy the relationship of owner and occupant. The plaintiff as owner instituted a summary process action against the defendant as occupant under the provisions of § 52-532 of the General Statutes to recover possession of certain premises in the town of Milford. The trial court sustained the plaintiff in his claim that the notice to quit dated and served upon the defendant on January 7, 1965, to quit possession on or before January 17, 1965, was a sufficient compliance with the statute, which provides, in relevant part, that the owner “shall give notice to the . . . occupant to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Treat v. Town Plan & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
- Sapiente v. WaltuchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Austin, Nichols Co., Inc. v. GilmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Feneck v. NowakowskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- Lunt v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Himes v. City of FlintMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
- Dmd Enterprises v. Esquilin, No. Sph 9110-62420 (Dec. 10, 1991)Connecticut Superior Court · 1991
- Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Buono, No. Spno 9407 16392 (Feb. 21, 1995)Connecticut Superior Court · 1995
- Pander v. FrenchConnecticut Appellate Court · 1966