Skip to main content
· 8/13/2021

Boardwalk Realty Associates, LLC v. M & S Gateway Associates, LLC

Citations

  • 340 Conn. 115

Syllabus

Pursuant to statute (§ 12-163a (a)), a municipality may request that the Superior Court appoint a receiver of rents or use and occupancy pay- ments for any property for which the owner is delinquent in the payment of real property taxes, and the ''receiver appointed by the court shall collect all rents or payments for use and occupancy forthcoming from the occupants of the [property] in question in place of the owner . . . .'' The plaintiff, which had been appointed, pursuant to § 12-163a (a), to serve as the receiver of rents for certain real property owned by C Co., sought to recover unpaid rent and use and occupancy fees from the defendants, M Co. and V Co., which have operated an automobile dealership on that property since 2001 without paying rent. C Co. leased the property to M Co. for a three year term, and M Co. thereafter exercised its option to renew the lease for another three year term, which expired in 2001. V Co., which is owned by M Co., subleased the property from M Co. pursuant to an agreement that incorporated the terms and rent obliga- tions of the lease. Shortly before the lease expired, C Co. effectively abandoned the property, which was allegedly contaminated and the subject of an ongoing enforcement action by the Department of Environ- mental Protection. The defendants thereafter continued to operate the dealership on the property, but, since 2001, they have failed to pay rent or to make use and occupancy payments to C Co., or to pay property taxes to the town in which the property is located. The parties filed separate motions for summary judgment. The defendants claimed that a receiver of rents appointed under § 12-163a has no authority to seek rent or use and occupancy payments with respect to an abandoned property, whereas the plaintiff claimed that it was entitled to seek rent and use and occupancy payments because, even though the lease with C Co. had expired, the defendants remained in possession as tenants, either at will or at suffera

Judges: Robinson; McDonald; D’Auria; Mullins; Kahn; Ecker; Keller

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.