Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Citation
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Parent Document
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1988-09-27
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7904487/visco-v-cody/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
Full Text
741 charsThere are two significant differences between this provision and § 47a-20: (1) under this provision, the tenant must have registered a complaint to some municipal agency or made some equivalent effort to remedy the condition, whereas § 47a-20 (3) allows a complaint to be made to the landlord directly; and (2) this provision permits a tenant to raise retaliation as an affirmative defense, which the tenant must then prove by a preponderance of evidence, whereas § 47a-20 establishes retaliation as a presumption, if a summary process action is initiated within six months of a complaint, which the landlord must then successfully rebut. See Mangiafico v. Saunders, Appellate Session of the Superior Court, Docket No. 900 (January 25,1980).