Branhaven Associates v. Vitrom, Inc.
Opinion
The plaintiff in this summary process action moves to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the defendant did not post a bond as required by General Statutes § 47a-35a (a).1 The sole issue is whether this particular bond requirement applies where premises are leased for use as a restaurant rather than as a dwelling unit. We conclude that the bond provision of § 47a-35a (a) does not apply to this appeal and, therefore, deny the motion to dismiss.
After the defendant failed to pay rent pursuant to a lease agreement between the parties, the plaintiff commenced a summary process action. The trial court rendered judgment for the plaintiff and this appeal followed.
The plaintiff argues that, pursuant to § 47a-35a (a), upon filing its appeal, the defendant was required to give a bond to guarantee payment of rents that may accrue while the appeal is pending. Section 47a-35a (a) provides in relevant part: “When any appeal is taken by the defendant occupying a dwelling unit as defined in section 47a-l in an action of summary process, he [515]*515shall, within the period allowed for taking such appeal, give a bond with surety to the adverse party to guarantee payment for all rents that may accrue during the pen-dency of such appeal . . . .” (Emphasis added.)
The defendant asserts that § 47a-35a (a) does not apply to this appeal because the defendant does not occupy a dwelling unit as defined in General Statutes § 47a-l. Section 47a-l (c) defines a dwelling unit as “any house or building, or portion thereof, which is occupied, is designed to be occupied, or is rented, leased or hired out to be occupied, as a home or residence of one or more persons.”
The parties’ lease agreement is entitled “shopping center lease” and provides for the use of the leased premises as a restaurant. Because the space was leased to the defendant for business purposes, the property does not satisfy the definition of a dwelling unit under § 47a-l and, therefore, § 47a-35a (a) does not apply.2
The motion to dismiss is denied.
In this opinion the other judges concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
671 A.2d 858 (Branhaven Associates v. Vitrom, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.