Housing Authority of Torrington v. Hoye, No. Cv18-7286 (Feb. 9, 2000)

Connecticut Superior Court

Housing Authority of Torrington v. Hoye, No. Cv18-7286 (Feb. 9, 2000)

2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 2654

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided February 9, 2000·No. No. CV18-7286·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MOTION TO DISMISS Pursuant to Practice Book § 10-30 et seq., the defendant respectfully moves that the Court dismiss this action for the following reasons:

1. On October 25, 1999, the plaintiff mailed a pretermination notice to the defendant advising him that his lease would terminate on November 30, 1999 for allegedly failing to comply with the terms of his lease. The notice makes no mention of the defendant's right to cure his alleged violation within 15 days and avoid lease termination.

2. The plaintiff's failure to include this information renders this notice invalid.

3. The plaintiff's failure to provide a valid pretermination notice to the defendant constitutes a failure to meet the conditions precedent to the commencement of an action under C.G.S. § 47a-15, and the Court therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this section.

WHEREFORE, the defendant respectfully requests that the Court dismiss the complaint.

ORDER The foregoing motion having been presented to the Court, it is hereby ORDERED: GRANTED

Frazzini, J. CT Page 2655

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MOTION TO DISMISS Pursuant to Practice Book § 10-30 et seq., the defendant respectfully moves that the Court dismiss this action for the following reasons:

1. On October 25, 1999, the plaintiff mailed a pretermination notice to the defendant advising him that his lease would terminate on November 30, 1999 for allegedly failing to comply with the terms of his lease. The notice makes no mention of the defendant's right to cure his alleged violation within 15 days and avoid lease termination.

2. The plaintiff's failure to include this information renders this notice invalid.

3. The plaintiff's failure to provide a valid pretermination notice to the defendant constitutes a failure to meet the conditions precedent to the commencement of an action under C.G.S. § 47a-15, and the Court therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this section.

WHEREFORE, the defendant respectfully requests that the Court dismiss the complaint.

ORDER The foregoing motion having been presented to the Court, it is hereby ORDERED: GRANTED

Frazzini, J. CT Page 2655

Housing Authority of Torrington v. Hoye, No. Cv18-7286 (Feb. 9, 2000), 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 2654 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 2654 (Housing Authority of Torrington v. Hoye, No. Cv18-7286 (Feb. 9, 2000)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related