Ruffo v. Levine, No. Cv21-8344 (Apr. 3, 1997)
Opinion of the Court
Based on the arguments and testimony submitted at the hearing, the Court finds that the notice to quit and the writ were served at the premises occupied by the defendant and which are the subject of this action. In addition, the Court finds that the defendant had checking accounts with two separate banks, one showing his address as "25 Greene Ave., Unit 3" the other as "23 Greene Ave." Testimony also established that the building where the premises are located and which the defendant occupied at Greene Avenue, Norwich, Connecticut has both the numbers 23 and 25 affixed thereto.
The misdescription in this case, if in fact it can be categorized as such, is so trivial that a reasonable person could not be confused by it.
Where the tenant is served at the correct address and the misdescription is so minor as to not confuse a reasonable person, a dismissal is not required. Holt v. Zona, SPNH 8408-07470 N.H. (1984) (N.H.H.D. #278); Proulx v. Sargent, SPNH 8411-8008 WH (1985); Kavanaugh v. Sharp, SPH 8309-20660 (1983).
The Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Tamborra, JTR
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.