Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Citation
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Parent Document
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1988-09-27
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7904487/visco-v-cody/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
- Visco v. Cody, 16 Conn. App. 444 (1988)
Full Text
853 charsThe evidence at trial, adduced through the testimony of both the plaintiff and Clifford Cody, was that the defendants had made several requests for work to be done in their apartment and that the plaintiff had responded to these requests. The plaintiff testified that, at the defendants’ request, he bled the bathroom radiator, tightened the bedroom windows and replaced the sash cords, weatherstripped the front door to eliminate drafts, fixed some loose tiles on the bathroom floor and provided paint to the defendants so that they could repaint the kitchen. On the basis of this evidence, the trial court determined that the protection afforded by General Statutes § 47a-20 had not been “triggered,” because the requested repairs did not “relate to defects which materially affect health and safety.” From this judgment, the defendants have appealed.