Legal Opinion
Messinger v. Laudano
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided May 28, 1985No. 3373PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtNigro, J.
This is an appeal by the defendants from a judgment granting immediate possession to the plaintiff landlord in a summary process action. The defendants claim that the trial court erred in determining that the notice to quit in this case was effective to establish jurisdiction. The defendants also allege that the notice, procedure and order of the court for “use and occupancy” payments were in error.
The defendants occupied an apartment on a month-to-month tenancy. On March 30, 1984, the plaintiff caused a notice to quit for nonpayment of the March rent to be served upon them. The notice…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Webb v. AmblerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Welk v. BidwellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- O'Keefe v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1946
- Vogel v. BacusSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1946
- Hour Publishing Co. v. GorezConnecticut Appellate Court · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- City of Bridgeport v. Barbour-Daniel Electronics, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Udolf v. West Hartford Spirit Shop, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- 136 Field Point Circle Holding Co., LLC v. RazinskiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016
- City of Bridgeport v. Barbour-Daniel Electronics, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Messinger v. LaudanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.