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
1,221 charsWe conclude that this interpretation of § 47a-20 will further the intent of the legislature without giving an unfair advantage to either tenants or landlords. If we were to construe “repairs” as meaning any repair, no matter how minor, we would encourage the inequitable scenario where month-to-month tenancies are unilaterally transformed into six month tenancies on the basis of a request, albeit in good faith, for the replacement of a light bulb or the tightening of a washer in a leaky faucet. What had then been intended as a shield for the benefit of tenants would be metamorphosed into a sword to deprive landlords of their property. Conversely, if we were to adopt the standard enunciated in Alteri, a tenant would be forced to always report a defect first to a municipal agency in order to prove that a substantial code violation exists. Not only would this rule discourage tenants from attempting to rectify defects by dealing directly with their landlord, under less volatile circumstances than an official complaint, but it would also meld two separate provisions *454of § 47a-20, creating a redundancy. See General Statutes § 47a-20 (1) and (3). We cannot assume that this was the intent of the legislature.