Ribeiro v. Town of Granby

Decision Date08 August 1985
Citation395 Mass. 608,481 N.E.2d 466
PartiesJames A. RIBEIRO et al., administrators, 1 v. TOWN OF GRANBY.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Cornelius J. Moriarty, II, Holyoke, for plaintiffs.

Raymond R. Randall, Town Counsel, Holyoke, for defendant.

Before HENNESSEY, C.J., and LIACOS, ABRAMS, NOLAN and LYNCH, JJ.

HENNESSEY, Chief Justice.

This is an action under G.L. c. 258, § 1 (1984 ed.), the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act, in which the plaintiffs, coadministrators of the estate of James A. Ribeiro, Jr., seek damages from the town of Granby (the town) for the death of their son in an apartment fire in January of 1983. The plaintiffs allege negligence on the part of a building inspector of the town, as well as members of the town's board of health, for their failure to require installation of a second means of egress from the decedent's apartment. The plaintiffs seek damages from the town for the wrongful death and for the conscious pain and suffering of the decedent.

A judge of the Superior Court allowed the town's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Mass.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), 365 Mass. 754 (1974). The plaintiffs appealed, and we ordered the matter to be transferred to this court. We affirm.

We summarize the facts as alleged in the plaintiffs' complaint. 2 Mary E. and Robert R. Niquette bought a house in Granby in January of 1962. At some point thereafter they began leasing apartments in the house to tenants. In November of 1974, the Granby board of health received a complaint that raw sewage was leaking from the septic system servicing the Niquettes' house. The record does not reflect whether any remedial action was taken. Further problems with the septic system arose periodically between the years 1978 and 1980. Several inspections occasioned by the septic problem, and by hazardous road conditions caused by freezing effluent, were conducted by the board of health in 1980, and letters were issued ordering Robert Niquette to correct the problem. A further inspection of the premises by the three members of the board of health was conducted on January 12, 1981, and resulted in the board's advising Robert Niquette that the two apartments at the premises were condemned as unfit for human habitation, and that both apartments should be kept vacant until the septic system was repaired. On April 14, 1981, a letter signed by the members of the board of health again advised Robert Niquette of the health code violations attributable to the uncorrected septic problem. It cited his inattention to the problem, stated that the premises were condemned and would be placarded, see 105 Code Mass.Regs. § 410.950 (1983), and notified him of his right to appeal.

Also on April 14, 1981, the building inspector of the town sent a letter which notified Robert Niquette that the building inspector had conducted an inspection of the exterior of the premises on April 9, 1981, and that the premises were in violation of several provisions of the State Building Code, 780 Code Mass.Regs. (1980). Section 2203.7 of the building code provides that "[a]ny existing building shall provide at least two (2) means of egress serving every story which are acceptable to the building official." The letter noted that it appeared the second story rear exit was either never constructed or was destroyed and never replaced. The letter specified what kind of egress would be acceptable to serve the two second story apartments and ordered that the work be done within ten days.

By letters, each dated May 21, 1981, and sent by certified mail, the building inspector specifically notified each of the second-story tenants (a Mr. Therrien and a Ms. Patridge) of the lack of two independent means of egress from the second floor. The letters stated that the fire department had also been informed of the problem. The letters included the following statement: "I cannot express the hazards adequately enough that only one exitway encompasses. Please inform all members of your family and person(s) that visit your home that you have only one exitway."

On December 21, 1981, Robert Niquette attended a Granby board of health meeting. During that meeting he informed the board members that he had two new single tenants (one of whom was the deceased, James Ribeiro, Jr.), and that because of decreased water usage the sewage problem was alleviated. He also informed the board that he had located someone to build a second means of egress as soon a the weather improved.

According to the complaint, a second means of egress from the second story apartments was never built. Neither the board of health nor the building inspector ever took action to compel compliance with the building code requirements. On January 1, 1983, roughly one year after Niquette had assured the board that a second means of egress would be constructed, a fire ensued at the Niquette premises. James Ribeiro, Jr., perished in his second floor apartment as a result of smoke inhalation and asphyxiation. The complaint alleges that the negligence of the building inspector and the members of the Granby board of health in failing to compel correction of the State building code and sanitary code violations, and the resultant lack of a second means of egress from the second story of the Niquette premises, were proximate causes of Ribeiro's death.

The arguments of the parties rightly concentrate in large part on Dinsky v. Framingham, 386 Mass. 801, 438 N.E.2d 51 (1982), and Irwin v. Ware, 392 Mass. 745, 467 N.E.2d 1292 (1984). In Dinsky, supra, 386 Mass. at 804, 438 N.E.2d 51, we recognized "the basic principle that the abrogation of the doctrine of governmental immunity by the Act [G.L. c. 258] simply removed the defense of immunity in certain tort actions against ... municipalities.... It did not create any new theory of liability for a municipality." We held in that case that "in the absence of a special duty owed to the plaintiffs, different from that owed to the public at large," id. at 810, 438 N.E.2d 51, the municipality would not be liable for the negligent issuance of building and occupancy permits. We concluded that there was no special duty owed to the plaintiff homeowners in the case, on the ground that there was no intention in the statutes or the State building code to create private causes of action on behalf of purchasers of premises which were developed in violation of governmental requirements. Id. at 809, 438 N.E.2d 51. See Nolan v. Parker, 15 Mass.App. 475, 478, 446 N.E.2d 722 (1983).

Most recently, in Irwin v. Ware, supra, 392 Mass. at 754-756, 467 N.E.2d 1292, we considered whether Dinsky applies to the negligent failure of police to exercise their statutory powers over intoxicated persons operating motor vehicles. Unlike the relevant legislation in Dinsky, the statutes at issue in Ware evidenced "a legislative intent to protect both intoxicated persons and other users of the highway." Id. at 762, 467 N.E.2d 1292. Moreover, in Ware we concluded that "the risk created by the negligence of [the] municipal employee [was] of immediate and foreseeable physical injury to persons who [could not] reasonably protect themselves from it." Id. at 756, 467 N.E.2d 1292. Consequently we found a special relationship between "a police officer who negligently fails to remove an intoxicated motorist from the highway, and a member of the public who suffers injury as a result of that failure." Id. at 762, 467 N.E.2d 1292.

The defendant has argued that this is an "inspection case," like Dinsky and unlike Ware, and that therefore there is no special relationship between the municipality and the decedent. We agree with ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • A.L. v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • April 21, 1988
    ...732, 87 Ill.Dec. 704, 477 N.E.2d 830 (1985). In this case, as in Dinsky v. Framingham, supra, Irwin v. Ware, supra, Ribeiro v. Granby, 395 Mass. 608, 481 N.E.2d 466 (1985), Nickerson v. Commonwealth, 397 Mass. 476, 492 N.E.2d 90 (1986), and Appleton v. Hudson, 397 Mass. 812, 494 N.E.2d 10 (......
  • Cyran v. Town of Ware
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • August 19, 1992
    ...the duty owed to the public at large. Nickerson v. Commonwealth, [397 Mass.] 476, 478 [492 N.E.2d 90] (1986). Ribeiro v. Granby, 395 Mass. 608, 613 [481 N.E.2d 466] (1985). Dinsky v. Framingham, 386 Mass. 801, 810 [438 N.E.2d 51] (1982)." Appleton v. Hudson, supra 397 Mass. at 815, 494 N.E.......
  • Pina v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • July 9, 1987
    ...cases discussed by the motion judge (Dinsky v. Framingham, 386 Mass. 801, 438 N.E.2d 51 [1982]; Irwin v. Ware, supra; Ribeiro v. Granby, 395 Mass. 608, 481 N.E.2d 466 [1985]; Nickerson v. Commonwealth, 397 Mass. 476, 492 N.E.2d 90 [1986]; Appleton v. Hudson, 397 Mass. 812, 494 N.E.2d 10 [19......
  • Jean W. v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • March 8, 1993
    ...Vehicles and individual harmed by uninsured driver, despite registrar's failure to revoke driver's registration); Ribeiro v. Granby, 395 Mass. 608, 481 N.E.2d 466 (1985) (no liability when failure to require correction of known code violation resulted in death in While Irwin and A.L. may "h......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Construction Law - Brian J. Morrissey
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 46-1, September 1994
    • Invalid date
    ...of Mobile, 410 So.2d 385 (Ala. 1982); Trianon Park Condo. Ass'n v. City of Hialeah, 468 So.2d 912 (Fla. 1985); Ribeiro v. Town of Granby, 481 N.E.2d 466 (Mass. 1985); Dinsky v. Town of Framingham, 438 N.E.2d 51 (Mass. 1982); Cracraft v. City of St. Louis Park, 279 N.W.2d 801 (Minn. 1979); D......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT