Waters Edge 938, LLC v. Mazzarella

Syllabus

The plaintiff landlord brought a summary process action against the defen- dant tenant by serving a notice to quit. The defendant failed to vacate the property by the required date, and the plaintiff filed a complaint alleging nonpayment of rent and lapse of time. In her answer, the defen- dant asserted a special defense pursuant to the statute (§ 47a-23c) that prohibits landlords from dispossessing disabled tenants residing in a building or complex that consists of five or more units without good cause. Even though the building in which the defendant resided con- sisted of only four units, she claimed that the statutory prohibition applied because D, a member of the plaintiff, was also a member of L Co., which owned the two unit building adjacent to her residence and, as such, the statute should have been broadly construed to define the two buildings as a complex that consisted of five or more units. The trial court rejected the defendant's special defense, concluding that § 47a-23c did not apply because the two buildings were not under the same ownership and the building in which the defendant resided con- sisted of only four units. The trial court rendered judgment for the plaintiff on the lapse of time count, and the defendant appealed to this court. Held that the trial court properly concluded that § 47a-23c did not apply to this action because the defendant did not reside in a complex consisting of five or more units: the defendant did not contest that her residence and the adjacent building were owned by different entities; moreover, the defendant did not offer sufficient evidence to establish that D had beneficial ownership of the two buildings, as, even though D had an ownership interest in the two landlord limited liability compa- nies that owned the buildings, no evidence was offered regarding his control of the entities or the properties, or any profit, benefit or advan- tage he received from the properties, and his use of the parking lot that was shared