Housing Authority v. Cyr, 234 Conn. App. 527 (2025)

Citation: Housing Authority v. Cyr, 234 Conn. App. 527 (2025)
Parent Document: Housing Authority v. Cyr, 234 Conn. App. 527 (2025)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2025-08-26
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10659980/housing-authority-v-cyr/ ↗

Full Text

2,183 chars

were met where notice set forth violations of rental
       agreement, house rules and regulations, and material
       noncompliance with statutory obligations), cert.
       denied, 335 Conn. 966, 240 A.3d 281 (2020).
          Additionally, this court has stated that the text of
       § 47a-15 clearly and unambiguously provides that the
       Kapa notice must specify, inter alia, the acts and omis-
       sions constituting the breach of the lease agreement.
       Housing Authority v. Rodriguez, supra, 178 Conn. App.
       127. Neither the text of § 47a-15 nor the relevant case
       law imposes a requirement that the Kapa notice must
       set forth the precise statutory or lease violations based
       on the improper conduct alleged.
          In the present case, the March, 2023 Kapa notice
       identified eight specific instances of conduct by the
       defendant—including his arrests, his use of illegal nar-
       cotics, his allowance of the use of narcotics on the
       premises, his threats made to a neighbor, and his allow-
       ance of unauthorized occupants to reside in the prem-
       ises—that constituted violations of the lease, the plain-
       tiff’s rules and regulations, and his statutory obligations
       as a tenant, and amounted to a nuisance. We conclude
       that this Kapa notice was sufficient to inform the defen-
       dant and protect against premature, discriminatory, or
       arbitrary eviction. See Housing Authority v. DeRoche,
       112 Conn. App. 355, 362, 962 A.2d 904 (2009); see also
       Milford Redevelopment & Housing Partnership v.
       Glicklin, supra, 228 Conn. App. 612 (Kapa notice pro-
       vided information necessary for defendant to defend
       herself against possible eviction and thus was valid).
       We conclude, therefore, that the trial court’s conclusion
       regarding the sufficiency of the Kapa notice was
       improper.
                                     C
         The plaintiff next claims that the court improperly
       concluded that the notice to quit was insufficient and,
Page 18                    CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                        0, 0

Other Sections in This Document (68)

Full Text