Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 21-79

Citation
Section 21-79
Parent Document
Eamiello v. Liberty Mobile Home Sales, Inc., 208 Conn. 620 (1988)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
1988-08-16

Other Sections in This Document (80)

Full Text

831 chars
We conclude that the court’s finding that the home was safe for human habitation was not clearly erroneous in view of the expert testimony of William Scarpetti, a Prospect building official. Mallory v. Mallory, 207 Conn. 48, 55, 539 A.2d 995 (1988). Moreover, the defendant had the burden of showing that the home was unsafe *638under § 21-79 (c) and did not present any such evidence. Accordingly, we need not decide whether § 21-68a is unconstitutional on its face because the statute was not applied in an unconstitutional fashion. A party “cannot mount a constitutional challenge to a statute on the basis of its possible applications in circumstances not presented by his own case, unless first amendment freedoms are affected, a situation not claimed to exist here.” State v. Madera, 198 Conn. 92, 106, 503 A.2d 136 (1985). V