Legal Opinion

Ossen v. Kreutzer

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided September 5, 1989No. 7297PublishedCited by 6 opinions

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

  1. Lampasona v. JacobsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
  2. Kapa Associates v. FloresConnecticut Superior Court · 1979
  3. Marrinan v. HamerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
  4. Hoban v. MastersConnecticut Superior Court · 1980

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Housing Authority v. HarrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
  2. Chipperini v. CrandallDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
  3. Housing Authority v. HarrisConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
  4. Ossen v. WanatConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
  5. Colonial Investors, LLC v. FurbushConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017

1 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