Freccia v. Freccia, 232 Conn. App. 353 (2025)

Citation: Freccia v. Freccia, 232 Conn. App. 353 (2025)
Parent Document: Freccia v. Freccia, 232 Conn. App. 353 (2025)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2025-05-06
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10513133/freccia-v-freccia/ ↗

Full Text

2,311 chars

rendered a judgment of possession in favor of the plain-
       tiff. On appeal, the defendants claim that (1) the notice
       to quit served on them was invalid, (2) the court improp-
       erly failed to conclude that equitable considerations
       precluded the plaintiff from obtaining judgment in her
       favor, and (3) the court prejudiced the defendants by
       consolidating five related summary process actions
       for trial.
          In AC 46040, the plaintiff, Theresa K. Freccia, in her
       capacity as executor of the estate of the decedent,
       brought a summary process action against the defen-
       dant, Frank J. Freccia III, doing business as Freccia
       Brothers Auto Sales, seeking to obtain a judgment of
       possession with respect to real property located at 246-
       248 West Putnam Avenue in Greenwich. In that action,
       the court rendered a judgment of possession in favor
       of the plaintiff. On appeal, the defendant claims that
       (1) the plaintiff lacked standing to commence the
       action, (2) the court improperly failed to conclude that
       he had a present right to remain in the subject property
       or that equitable considerations precluded the plaintiff
       from obtaining a judgment in her favor, and (3) the
       court prejudiced the defendant by consolidating five
       related summary process actions for trial. We affirm
       the judgments of the court.
         The following procedural history is relevant to our
       resolution of the claims raised in these appeals. In the
       case underlying AC 46037, the plaintiff alleged that,
       on June 1, 2019, the defendants, Guin and D’Andrea,
       entered into an oral lease for the use and occupancy
       of 95 Byram Road in Greenwich. It is undisputed that
       Guin is the granddaughter of the plaintiff and the dece-
       dent and that D’Andrea is Guin’s fiancé. The plaintiff
       who had a right of survivorship in the subject property, became the sole
       owner of the property. The court granted the motion. Thus, by the time of
       trial, Theresa K. Freccia, in her individual capacity, was the plaintiff in the
       underlying action.
Page 4                            CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                       0, 0

Other Sections in This Document (93)

Full Text