In Brennan v. Fairfield, 255 Conn. 693, 695, 768 A.2d 433 (2001), the plaintiff brought a complaint against the defendant pursuant to 13a-149. The defendant thereafter sought to dismiss the complaint, claiming that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff did not provide notice within ninety days of the alleged occurrence. Id. at 696, 768 A.2d 433. Framing the issue, the Court sought to determine "whether notice is timely when it is received by a town official on the ninety-second day, under [ 13a-149], when the municipal office that is authorized to receive the notice is closed on the ninetieth and ninety-first days." Id. at 694-95. The Brennan court concluded that a plaintiff must be afforded a full ninety days to file notice, and that when the clerk's office is closed on the ninetieth day, notice that is given on the first day thereafter on which the office is open complies with the statute. Id. at 698. In reaching that conclusion, the Brennan court stated that the phrase "be given to" in 13a-149 is susceptible of different interpretations. Id. at 702. The court further stated that "we think, however, that the most sensible interpretation of this phrase in the context of the statute affords a claimant ninety days to deliver notice to the town clerk's office, which, in turn, must be open to receive the notice." Id. at 703.