Section 47a-20a
- Citation
- Section 47a-20a
- Parent Document
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1986-03-24
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360686/murphy-v-baez/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (26)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Murphy v. Baez, 515 A.2d 383 (1986)
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
- Section 47a-20a
Full Text
461 charsWhile no case cited to the court establishes whether the presumption of § 47a-20 may be rebutted by reasons other than those found in § 47a-20a, the court is of the opinion that the language of § 47a-20a clearly delineates the only grounds for such rebuttal. As a result, the plaintiff’s claim, that his unlawful lockout of the defendant established his prior intent to evict and therefore rebuts the statutory presumption of retaliatory eviction, is incorrect.