A Connecticut appellate court recently ruled in favor of 65-99 Burban Associates, LLC, affirming a lower court's decision to evict the New Antioch Church of God and its pastor, Esau A. Greene, Jr., for nonpayment of rent. This ruling, issued on July 21, 2026, affects the church and its operations, highlighting issues surrounding tenant rights and landlord obligations.

The case, titled 65-99 Burban Associates, LLC v. New Antioch Church of God (AC48394), centers on a dispute over a commercial lease agreement. The court's decision is significant as it clarifies the legal standards for self-representation in court and the requirements for raising defenses in eviction proceedings.

Background

The parties involved in this case are 65-99 Burban Associates, LLC, the landlord, and New Antioch Church of God, along with its pastor, Esau A. Greene, Jr., who represented himself during the appeal. The conflict arose from a five-year lease agreement signed in March 2021, which required the church to pay monthly rent for a property in Branford, Connecticut. Over time, the church fell behind on rent payments, accumulating a significant debt.

In May 2024, after the church failed to pay rent, the landlord served a notice to quit possession of the premises. When the church did not vacate the property, Burban Associates initiated a summary process action in court to reclaim possession. Greene, who was self-represented at the trial, raised several defenses, including claims of uninhabitability and retaliation, which he argued should prevent the eviction.

The Ruling

The Connecticut Appellate Court, composed of Judges Suarez, Clark, and Seeley, ruled to affirm the trial court's judgment of possession in favor of the landlord. The court stated, "We decline to review G’s claim that he was denied the right to self-representation at trial, as G failed to properly preserve his claim for appellate review and the claim was inadequately briefed." This statement highlights the importance of properly presenting claims during trial proceedings.

The court also addressed Greene's claims regarding the alleged uninhabitability of the property and the assertion that the eviction was retaliatory. The judges noted that these claims were raised for the first time on appeal, which meant they were not preserved for review. The ruling emphasized that issues must be distinctly raised at the trial level for an appellate court to consider them.

Impact

The ruling has significant implications for both the church and future eviction cases in Connecticut. It reinforces the necessity for tenants to properly present their defenses during initial court proceedings. The court's decision also underscores the importance of following procedural rules, especially for self-represented litigants. Greene's failure to adequately brief his claims ultimately led to their dismissal on appeal.

This case may serve as a precedent for similar disputes involving self-represented parties, emphasizing the need for thorough preparation and adherence to legal standards. It also highlights the challenges faced by tenants in eviction proceedings, particularly when they do not fully understand the legal process.

What's Next

Details were not available in the court filing regarding any potential for further appeals. However, the church has filed a separate appeal related to this case, indicating that the legal battle may continue in another form.