Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Seramonte CT, LLC v. Blau (2025)

Citation
Seramonte CT, LLC v. Blau (2025)
Parent Document
Seramonte CT, LLC v. Blau (2025)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2025-12-23

Full Text

1,751 chars
Supreme Court recently interpreted the phrase ‘‘ ‘based
       . . . upon’ ’’ in § 42-150bb with respect to the amount
       of the attorney’s fees awarded to a consumer. Centrix
       Management Co., LLC v. Fosberg, supra, 349 Conn.
       767. Specifically, it explained that this phrase was not
       defined in the statutory language, and that the meanings
       in various dictionaries in print at the time of the statute’s
       enactment ‘‘all share a core principle: to base something
       on another thing means to use the base as the founda-
       tion.’’ Id., 772. The parties’ lease was neither the founda-
       tion of the plaintiff’s summary process action nor the
       reason that the defendants prevailed in that matter. See
       Retained Realty, Inc. v. Spitzer, supra, 643 F. Supp.
       2d 236. As we have explained, the plaintiff’s summary
       process action was based on the plaintiff’s allegations
       of conduct constituting a serious nuisance, which in
       turn is premised on our statutes. Furthermore, the
       defendants prevailed in the summary process action
       not as a result of the parties’ lease, but because the
       allegations against them were outside the statutory lan-
       guage of § 47a-15 (a). The trial court specifically
       explained that ‘‘the incidents were directed at indepen-
       dent contractors of the plaintiff and do not fit the strict
       confines of the serious nuisance statute.’’ (Emphasis
       added.) For these reasons, we conclude that the trial
       court properly denied the defendants’ motion for attor-
       ney’s fees filed pursuant to § 42a-150bb.
         The judgment is affirmed.
         In this opinion the other judges concurred.