TOV Realty, LLC v. Suarez

Syllabus

Prior to the commencement of the present summary process action, the defen- dant tenant, S, filed a complaint with the Hartford Fair Rent Commission, alleging that the plaintiff landlord was unfairly increasing his monthly rent. While the proceeding before the commission was pending, the plaintiff served S with a notice to quit for nonpayment of rent. Thereafter, the commission, following a hearing, found that the plaintiff's proposed rent increase was unfair and that the plaintiff had retaliated against S by seeking an eviction within six months from the filing of S's fair rent complaint, in violation of statute (§ 47a-20). The commission also ordered the plaintiff to cease and desist from pursuing its retaliatory eviction and to withdraw its summary process action. Shortly after the commission issued its decision, however, the plaintiff served S with its summary process complaint. The plaintiff, pursuant to statute (§ 7-148e), also filed an administrative appeal in the Superior Court, challenging the commission's decision. In the summary process action, S raised the special defense of retaliatory eviction and an equitable defense seeking dismissal of the action in light of the commission's decision and order. Thereafter, the trial court granted S's motion to stay the summary process action pending the resolution of the administrative appeal. The plaintiff, upon certification by the Chief Justice, pursuant to statute (§ 52-265a), that a matter of substantial public interest was involved, appealed to this court from the trial court's decision to grant S's motion to stay the summary process action. On appeal, the plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the trial court lacked the statutory authority to stay the summary process action and, in the alternative, that the court had abused its discretion in doing so. Held: A review of the relationship between the fair rent commission statutes (§§ 7-148b through 7-148f) and the landlord-tenant statutes (§ 47a-1 et seq.), as well