Vesce v. Lee

In Vesce v. Lee, 185 Conn. 328, 336, 441 A.2d 556 (1981), the Court recognized that unless there is an express agreement between the parties, there is a rebuttable presumption that payments made by one party, after the other party vacates the premises, continue to accrue for the benefit of both parties. The Vesce court held that the presumption had not been overcome in that case and that the plaintiff would share the proceeds equally with the defendant despite the fact that the party in possession -- the defendant -- had borne the expenses for maintenance, improvements and mortgage payments. Id., 337-38.