DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Airport Industrial Ltd. Partnership, 74 Conn. App. 460 (2003)

Citation
Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Airport Industrial Ltd. Partnership, 74 Conn. App. 460 (2003)
Parent Document
Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Airport Industrial Ltd. Partnership, 74 Conn. App. 460 (2003)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2003-01-07
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7911981/beal-bank-ssb-v-airport-industr... ↗

Other Sections in This Document (15)

Full Text

771 chars 
At oral argument before this court, the plaintiff contended that the trial court properly determined that the plaintiff was entitled to hold the tenants’ security deposits because all the tenants attorned to the plaintiff with respect to their leases and, therefore, the tenants’ participation in these proceedings was unnecessary. Attornment is “[t]he agreement of a person to recognize a third party as a permissible successor party to a contract; most often, the *464agreement of a tenant to pay rent to a new landlord, especially a mortgagee who has foreclosed.” Black’s Law Dictionary (6th Ed. 1990). There is absolutely no evidence in the record regarding attornment between the plaintiff and the tenants and, therefore, the plaintiff’s contention is without merit.