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
1,262 charsIn light of our precedent requiring us to give effect to every provision of a lease, we cannot accept the defendant’s line of argument essentially asking us to ignore the final sentence of paragraph 17 and assume that the waiver provision either was included erroneously in the lease as a holdover from a form lease drafted prior to the amendment of § 47a-25 in 1980, or was inserted into the lease as a purposefully unenforceable waiver clause. Our conclusion in this regard is supported further by paragraph 34 of the lease, which states: “If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this [l]ease or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this [ljease, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each term, covenant, condition and provision of this [ljease shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law.” Under paragraph 34, the only possible reading of the waiver provision *644in paragraph 17 is its lawful, enforceable meaning—a waiver of the right to a notice to quit where the lease terminates for lapse of time.