Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Grimes v. Housing Authority, 242 Conn. 236 (1997)

Citation
Grimes v. Housing Authority, 242 Conn. 236 (1997)
Parent Document
Grimes v. Housing Authority, 242 Conn. 236 (1997)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
1997-07-29

Other Sections in This Document (48)

Full Text

967 chars
Furthermore, events subsequent to the filing of the Connelly complaint provided the defendant with further notice that some of the plaintiffs in the Connelly class would present damage claims for personal injuries resulting from the lack of hot water in their apartments. After counsel for the class stated at the preliminary injunction hearing on December 18, 1981, that his clients were concerned that children were being put in danger because families had to resort to boiling water in order to take baths, the defendant should have been able to foresee that one or more of the Connelly plaintiffs, like the named plaintiff here, would sustain severe burns from boiling hot water. The fact that the named plaintiffs previously described injuries “may be more or less extensive than that of some of the class members is not sufficient to make [their] claims ‘markedly differ*251ent’ from that of the class.” Campbell v. Board of Education, supra, 36 Conn. Sup. 366.