Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)

Citation
Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
Parent Document
Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2002-12-17

Full Text

1,061 chars
The following facts are necessary for the resolution of the plaintiffs appeal. The plaintiff owns a piece of commercial property at 4 Old Middle Street, Goshen. On February 2,1998, the defendant entered into a lease with the plaintiff to rent the rear portion of the property. The defendant intended to operate an auto sales and repair business. Paragraph C of the lease was a zoning contingency clause that stated, “Landlord [plaintiff] will use Landlord’s best efforts to obtain a written verification that Tenant [defendant] can operate [an] Auto Sales and Repair Business at the demised premises. If Landlord is unable to obtain such commitment from the municipality, then this agreement shall be deemed null and void and Landlord shall immediately return all deposit monies to Tenant.” The leasing period would commence on or about March 1, 1998, and conclude on or about February 28, 2013. The leasing agreement also stated that the first two months of occupancy *185would be free of charge to allow the defendant an opportunity to establish the business.