Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Housing Authority v. Olesen, 31 Conn. App. 359 (1993)

Citation
Housing Authority v. Olesen, 31 Conn. App. 359 (1993)
Parent Document
Housing Authority v. Olesen, 31 Conn. App. 359 (1993)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
1993-05-18

Full Text

1,290 chars
Our state law provides a broad range of statutes and regulations governing lead-based paint testing and abatement.5 Included in that body of law is the statutorily established affirmative duty of a landlord to do whatever is necessary to put and keep the premises in a fit and habitable condition, including its being free of paint with an impermissible lead content. This duty has its provenance in General Statutes § 47a-7 (a), which imposes a number of responsibilities on the landlord including the mandate in subdivision (2) that a landlord “make all repairs and do whatever is necessary to put and keep the premises in a fit and habitable condition . . . . ” The expansion of that duty to include lead-based paint abatement is unequivocally furnished by General Statutes § 47a-8, which provides in relevant part that “[t]he presence of paint which does not conform to federal standards as required in accordance with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act, Chapter 63 of the Social Security Act, as amended. . . shall be construed to render such dwelling unit *363. . . unfit for human habitation and shall constitute a noncompliance with subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of section 47a-7.” A violation of § 47a-8, therefore, constitutes a per se violation of § 47a-7 (a) (2).