HASLAM-JAMES v. Lawrence, 35 A.3d 368 (2012)

Citation: HASLAM-JAMES v. Lawrence, 35 A.3d 368 (2012)
Parent Document: HASLAM-JAMES v. Lawrence, 35 A.3d 368 (2012)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2012-01-31
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2326384/haslam-james-v-lawrence/ ↗

Full Text

1,065 chars

We perceive no clear error in the court’s finding that the defendant’s reliance on information conveyed by Calloway was reasonable under the circumstances, and we note that the plaintiff does not challenge this finding. Here, the defendant abided by the statutes governing summary process and entered into a stipulated agreement accepted by the court for judgment and delaying the initiation of her right to obtain possession of the unit by execution against the plaintiff. Under the facts of this case, as found by the court, it was not unreasonable for the defendant, on the basis of the information provided by Calloway that the plaintiff had abandoned or vacated the premises, to act earlier than the parties’ stipulation had required. Accordingly, we determine that the court did not err in concluding that the defendant did not violate § 47a-16 when she acted in reliance on representations of the plaintiff conveyed through Calloway, an employee of the Hartford housing authority, that the plaintiff had abandoned or surrendered the subject premises. *330 II

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text