Rogalis, LLC v. Vazquez

Syllabus

The plaintiff sought, by way of summary process, immediate possession of certain residential property that it had acquired and that was occupied by the named defendant, V. The plaintiff alleged that it did not have a tenancy agreement with V. Although the state had a temporary morato- rium on evictions per the governor's executive orders issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the plaintiff alleged one of the recognized exceptions created by those orders, namely, that the plaintiff's sole member, R, had a bona fide intention to use the dwelling unit as his principal residence. During trial, R testified that the plaintiff purchased the premises in October, 2020, from S Co., and that he had a bona fide intention to use the premises as his principal residence. V, however, indicated that the plaintiff brought this action as a result of a loophole in a prior summary process action brought by S Co. against V and her estranged husband, D, and that she did not believe R had a bona fide intent to occupy the premises as his principal residence. In that prior summary process action, S Co., alleging that D was delinquent in his rental payments, commenced its action shortly after V had commenced a dissolution action against D. As a result, the trial court stayed S Co.'s action through the pendency of the dissolution action, which was still pending, and, therefore, temporarily removed S Co.'s right to maintain the summary process action in the absence of an order from the family court. S Co. thereafter conveyed the property to the plaintiff. Following trial on the plaintiff's summary process action, the court issued a memo- randum of decision, concluding that the plaintiff had not established that its ownership rights to the premises included the right to maintain the summary process action. Thereafter, the trial court rendered judg- ment dismissing the action, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. On appeal, the plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the trial court