Legal Opinion

Hoban v. Masters

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided October 31, 1980No. FILE NO. 915PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBieluch, J.

The plaintiff instituted this summary process action to recover possession of premises leased by him to the defendant, based on the defendant’s failure to pay rent. The defendant claimed that a leaking roof rendered the premises untenantable within the meaning of the lease, so that no rent was due. The trial court rendered judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff has appealed.

The sole issue to be decided is whether the premises were untenantable within the meaning of the lease or any applicable statute, thereby absolving the defendant of her obligation to pay rent. The following facts…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Thomas v. RoperSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  2. Ford v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders International UnionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
  3. Reid v. MillsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
  4. Ford v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders International UnionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Johnson v. FullerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  2. Housing Authority v. HarrisConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
  3. A & M Towing & Recovery, Inc. v. GuaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
  4. Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Airport Industrial Ltd. PartnershipConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
  5. Ossen v. KreutzerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989

6 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