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

2,496 chars

properly attacks the jurisdiction of the court, essentially
       asserting that the plaintiff cannot as a matter of law
       and fact state a cause of action that should be heard
       by the court. . . . A motion to dismiss tests, inter alia,
       whether, on the face of the record, the court is without
       jurisdiction.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Gib-
       son v. Jefferson Woods Community, Inc., 206 Conn.
       App. 303, 306, 260 A.3d 1244, cert. denied, 339 Conn.
       911, 261 A.3d 747 (2021). A claim that a court lacks
       subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time
       during the proceedings, including on appeal. See, e.g.,
       Mention v. Kensington Square Apartments, 214 Conn.
       App. 720, 727, 280 A.3d 1195 (2022). Thus, a challenge
       to a court’s subject matter jurisdiction is a threshold
       matter that we must resolve prior to addressing the
       claims on appeal. See Housing Authority v. Martin, 95
       Conn. App. 802, 808, 898 A.2d 245, cert. denied, 280
       Conn. 904, 907 A.2d 90 (2006).
          ‘‘There is no doubt that the Superior Court is author-
       ized to hear summary process cases; the Superior Court
       is authorized to hear all cases except those over which
       the probate courts have original jurisdiction. General
       Statutes § 51-164s. The jurisdiction of the Superior
       Court in summary process actions, however, is subject
       to [certain] condition[s] precedent. . . . [B]efore a
       landlord may pursue its statutory remedy of summary
       process . . . the landlord must prove its compliance
       with all the applicable preconditions set by state and
       federal law for the termination of a lease.’’ (Citation
       omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Presiden-
       tial Village, LLC v. Perkins, 332 Conn. 45, 56, 209 A.3d
       616 (2019). ‘‘When a defendant is a tenant of federally
       subsidized housing, federal law must be followed in
       addition to state law. . . . Under federal law, 42 U.S.C.
       § 1437d (l) and 24 C.F.R. § 966.4 (l) (3),8 a landlord is
         8
           Title 24 of the 2021 edition of the Code of Federal Regulations, § 966.4,
       provides in relevant part: ‘‘A lease shall be entered into between the PHA and
       each tenant of a dwelling unit which shall contain the provisions described
Page 10                        CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                                     0, 0

Other Sections in This Document (60)

Full Text