First Class Props. v. McCain, C.A. No. JP16-20-005892

• Court: Court of Justice of Peace Court of Delaware
• Writing for the Court: Alston-Jackson, J.
• Parties: FIRST CLASS PROPERTIES, Plaintiff Below, Appellee, v. JOSEPH MCCAIN, Defendant Below, Appellant.
• Docket Number: C.A. No. JP16-20-005892
• Decision Date: 18 March 2021

FIRST CLASS PROPERTIES, Plaintiff Below, Appellee,
v.
JOSEPH MCCAIN, Defendant Below, Appellant.

C.A. No. JP16-20-005892

JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURT NO. 16 OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR KENT COUNTY

March 18, 2021

TRIAL DE NOVO

Appearances:
First Class Properties, appearing represented by David C. Zerbato, Esq.,
Joseph McCain, was represented by Tasha M. Stevens, Esq.

ORDER

Wilson, J.
Hutchison, J.
Alston-Jackson, J.

On March 18, 2021 this Court, consisting of the Honorable Kevin L. Wilson, the Honorable Cathleen M. Hutchison and the Honorable Nicole Alston-Jackson, acting as a special court, pursuant to 25 Del. C. §5717(a)¹ convened for a trial de novo² in reference to a Landlord-Tenant Summary Possession petition filed by First Class Properties ("Plaintiff") against Joseph McCain ("Defendant").

Pretrial, Defendant motioned the Court for dismissal on the basis of failure to meet requirements of Landlord-Tenant Code, 25 Del. C. §5707. The statute states plainly, the complaint shall:

(1) State the interest of the plaintiff in the rental unit from which removal is sought;
(2) State the defendant's interest in the rental unit and defendant's relationship to the petitioner with regard thereto;

Page 2

(3) Describe the rental unit from which removal is sought;
(4) State the facts upon which the proceeding is based and attach a copy of any written notice of the basis of the claim as an exhibit to the complaint; and
(5) State the relief sought which may include a judgment for rent due if the notice of complaint contains a conspicuous notice that such demand has been made.

Upon review of Plaintiff's complaint filing, dated December 10, 2020, the Court determined the petition constitutes a statutory violation, in that it lacks specificity. The complaint fails to state a concise statement of facts as required by 25 Del. C. §5707.

Defendant further reasoned dismissal of the complaint filing pursuant to 25 Del. C. §5708.³ Defendant argued Urban v. Justice of the Peace Court 13 appropriately applied statute relative to the motion before the Court.⁴ However, the Court will not yield to Defendant's argument in this regard, as language codified in this section and the case law scenario, apply to rules violations under the Landlord-Tenant Code. The complaint filing before the Court is based on nonpayment of rent, therefore §5708 of the statute is not applicable.

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. The petition is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT...