Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Citation
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Parent Document
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1993-07-20
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
- Nielsen v. Wisniewski, 32 Conn. App. 133 (1993)
Full Text
823 charsThe evidence introduced at trial supports the following facts. In November, 1983, the plaintiffs entered into an oral contract with the defendants to lease a third floor apartment at 256 Washington Boulevard in Stamford. The defendants owned that building and several other residential properties and were in the business of renting residential properties. The plaintiffs, along with their four young children, took possession of the apartment. At the time, the plaintiffs were aware that the premises needed substantial renovation. For a long period before and after the plaintiffs moved in, the condition of the leased premises had been in substantial violation of health and safety codes, despite numerous written warnings to the defendants. Among the numerous violations was the lack of smoke detectors on the premises.