Milford Redevelopment & Housing Partnership v. Glicklin, 228 Conn. App. 593 (2024)

Citation: Milford Redevelopment & Housing Partnership v. Glicklin, 228 Conn. App. 593 (2024)
Parent Document: Milford Redevelopment & Housing Partnership v. Glicklin, 228 Conn. App. 593 (2024)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2024-10-15
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10136084/milford-redevelopment-housing-... ↗

Full Text

2,609 chars

area(s) that are defined on a property-by-property basis.
       Each resident will be given a site map that indicates
       the specific locations.’’ The no-smoking policy further
       provides: ‘‘Failure of any Tenant to follow the [no-smok-
       ing] policy will be considered a lease violation and will
       subject the resident to all lease enforcement procedures
       under the [plaintiff’s] Admissions and Continued Occu-
       pancy Policy (ACOP), which include termination of
       lease.’’ The property has a designated smoking area that
       is located twenty-five feet from the entrance to the
       building.
          On July 26, 2021, the defendant signed a copy of
       the no-smoking policy and attested: ‘‘I have read and
       understand the above smoking policy, and I agree to
       comply fully with the provisions. I understand that fail-
       ure to comply may constitute cause for termination of
       my lease.’’ On October 1, 2021, the defendant entered
       into a written lease with the plaintiff to renew her use
       and occupancy of the property. On June 8, 2022, the
       plaintiff’s video surveillance system captured the defen-
       dant smoking within twenty-five feet of the building.
       On June 13, 2022, the plaintiff caused a pretermination
       notice to be sent to the defendant on the basis that she
       had ‘‘smoked within twenty-five feet of [the building],
       despite prior warnings and having full knowledge of
       [the no-smoking policy].’’ The pretermination notice
       informed the defendant that she had a right to initiate
       the plaintiff’s federally mandated grievance process by
       contacting the plaintiff ‘‘no later than ten days after you
       receive this notice, or by June 27, 2022,’’ and provided
       the ways in which she could contact the plaintiff.4 Addi-
       tionally, the pretermination notice included a cure pro-
       vision, which provided: ‘‘If the above violations cannot
         4
           Specifically, the pretermination notice stated: ‘‘You have a right to use
       the Tenant Grievance Procedures to address the issues contained in this
       [pretermination notice]. In order to do this, you MUST do BOTH of the
       following: i) Contact [the plaintiff] no later than ten days after you receive
       this Notice, or by June 27, 2022; and ii) Make a specific request to use the
       tenant grievance procedures. You may contact [the plaintiff] to request to
Page 4                        CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                                     0, 0

Other Sections in This Document (60)

Full Text