Deveaux v. Spekter
Decision Date | 26 March 1963 |
Citation | 150 Conn. 418,190 A.2d 484 |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Parties | Zena L. DEVEAUX et al. v. Luba SPEKTER. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut |
Morton C. Hansen, Jr., Simsbury, with whom, on the brief, were I. Albert Lehrer, West Hartford, William J. Singer, Hartford, Theodore Lubinsky, West Hartford, and David L. Gussak, for the appellant (defendant).
Samuel Freed, Hartford, for the appellees (plaintiffs).
Before BALDWIN, C. J., and KING, MURPHY, SHEA and ALCORN, JJ.
The plaintiff Zena Deveaux, a minor, and her mother, the plaintiff Joyce Deveaux, brought this action to recover damages for pneumonia and bronchitis allegedly contracted by Zena because of cold and dampness in the tenement rented from the defendant, and for the incidental medical expenses incurred by Joyce. The trial court submitted the case to a jury on two counts of the complaint which alleged negligent failure to make repairs which the defendant had agreed to make. The jury returned a verdict for both plaintiffs which the trial court refused to set aside. The defendant has appealed from the judgment.
Of the many assignments of error filed by the defendant, we need consider only the one which raises the question whether there was sufficient evidence to permit a conclusion by the jury that the defendant negligently failed to perform a valid and enforceable contract to make repairs within the rented premises. Incidental to this is the claim that Joyce's testimony amounted to a judicial admission of the existence of the controlling facts.
The parties accept the basic principle that out of a valid and enforceable agreement by the landlord to make repairs may arise an obligation the breach of which would give rise to an action for negligence. Stevens v. Yale, 101 Conn. 683, 687, 127 A. 283; Dean v. Hershowitz, 119 Conn. 398, 410, 177 A. 262; Chipman v. National Savings Bank, 128 Conn. 493, 495, 23 A.2d 922. The defendant does not contend that the jury could not find that she agreed to repair certain defective windows and doors and provide a heating unit which was not defective, or that Zena's illness could not be attributed to the defendant's failure to make the promised repairs. No claim is made that the defects complained of, if found to exist, were unknown to the defendant; DesMarchais v. Daly, 135 Conn. 623, 625, 67 A.2d 549; Rumberg v. Cutler, 86 Conn. 8, 10, 84 A. 107; or indeed that the agreement itself, if established, would not import knowledge that the repairs were necessary. Scibek v. O'Connell, 131 Conn. 557, 560, 41 A.2d 251. The narrow issue is over the application of the following statement of law: Papallo v. Meriden Savings Bank, 128 Conn. 563, 565, 24 A.2d 472, 473.
The plaintiffs occupied the premises under an oral month-to-month tenancy. They contend that the agreement to repair, made at the end of October, as well as at the end of other months, was followed by the payment of a month's rent. If the rent was...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hickey v. Town of Newtown
...Southern New England Telephone Co., 140 Conn. 414, 420, 101 A.2d 491; Conti v. Brown, 149 Conn. 465, 467, 181 A.2d 591; Deveaux v. Spekter, 150 Conn. ----, 190 A.2d 484. The complaint also alleged that the highway was defective, apart from the defect consisting of the presence of the sand a......
-
Mitchell v. Simmons
...part because she anticipated that her landlord would complete the balance of his agreement to repair. We agree with Deveaux v. Spekter, 150 Conn. 418, 190 A.2d 484 (1963), in which faced with similar circumstances the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors The jury could reasonably find that t......
-
Svenningsen v. Huey
...that he did not see the defendant's car. The jury would then be privileged to credit or discredit either statement. Deveaux v. Spekter, 150 Conn. 418, 422, 190 A.2d 484; 9 Wigmore, Evidence (3d Ed.) §§ 2588, 2594a. The plaintiff's statement that he did not see the defendant's car might be e......