Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47a-27 (2026)

(Formerly Sec. 52-535). Summary process by assignee and mortgagee

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The remedy provided by this chapter in favor of lessors shall extend to all persons deriving title from the lessor or lessee of any land, building, apartment or dwelling unit and to the mortgagee of any land, building, apartment or dwelling unit, after his title has become absolute by foreclosure, and to all persons deriving title from him, or from the mortgagor. On a complaint by the mortgagee or his assigns, it shall be sufficient for him to prove the mortgage and his title thereunder, the foreclosure and the failure to redeem, that notice to quit at or after the expiration of the time limited for redemption has been served on the defendant and that he is the mortgagor, or one holding under him, and holds possession after the expiration of the term specified in such notice, unless the defendant can show a superior title in himself.

(1949 Rev., 8278; P.A. 77-451, S. 8.)

History: Sec. 52-535 transferred to Sec. 47a-27 in 1977; P.A. 77-451 added references to dwelling units.

Annotation to former section 52-535:

Grantee of leased premises succeeds to lessor's remedy for a forfeiture of the lease. 70 C. 357.

Annotations to present section:

If lease is subsequent to mortgage, foreclosure extinguishes lease and summary process is an appropriate remedy. 52 CA 37.

Cited. 38 CS 70.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1982–1999 · leading case: Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Van Sickle, 726 A.2d 600 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Van Sickle, 726 A.2d 600 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 3× “General Statutes § 47a-27 sets forth the requirements for a mortgagee to regain possession and it “makes clear that mortgagees who obtain title by foreclosure, have the same rights under the summary process provisions as any other landlords.”

Hite v. Field, 462 A.2d 393 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1982). · cites it 3× “That argument is based primarily on the theory that General Statutes § 47a-27, which permits such a mortgagee to utilize the summary process procedure, would be a “nullity” because mortgagees would always prefer the speedier ejectment permitted by § 49-22.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.