Ossen v. Kreutzer
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.
The plaintiff appeals from the judgment dismissing his summary process action. The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether, as a jurisdictional prerequisite to a summary process action initiated pursuant to General Statutes § 21-80 (b) (3) (B),1 the plaintiff must allege in his complaint a “preliminary and distinct thirty day written notice period.”
*566The facts are not in dispute. On December 3, 1987, the plaintiff lessor and the defendant lessee entered into a written lease for the rental of a mobile home lot. Under the terms of the lease, the defendant agreed to pay an annual rent of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lampasona v. JacobsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Kapa Associates v. FloresConnecticut Superior Court · 1979
- Marrinan v. HamerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- Hoban v. MastersConnecticut Superior Court · 1980
3Cited by6 opinions
- Housing Authority v. HarrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Chipperini v. CrandallDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
- Housing Authority v. HarrisConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Ossen v. WanatConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- Colonial Investors, LLC v. FurbushConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.