Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Citation
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Parent Document
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 2013-06-25
Other Sections in This Document (19)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
- Firstlight Hydro Generating Co. v. First Black Ink, LLC, 143 Conn. App. 635 (2013)
Full Text
640 charsOn appeal, the defendant contends—as it has throughout the trial court proceedings—that it did not expressly waive its right to a notice to quit, and accordingly, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action. The defendant further asserts that the court incorrectly found it had waived its right to a notice to quit, claiming that because the waiver language in the lease is contained in a paragraph that concerns only the plaintiffs rights upon the “lessee’s default” of its obligations, the waiver does not extend to the circumstances present here, where the lease terminated for lapse of time. We are not persuaded.