Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Citation
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Parent Document
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1996-11-07
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
Full Text
625 charsThe defendants’ motions to strike raise two issues of first impression: (1) whether adequate security is one of the “essential services” that a landlord may be required to provide under § 47a-13 (a); and (2) whether the “actual damages” that a tenant may recover for a landlord’s wilful failure to provide an essential service includes damages for personal injuries. The court holds that § 47a-13 does not authorize a cause of action for the recovery of damages for personal injuries and, therefore, the court will reserve for another time the question of whether adequate security may be an essential service under § 47a-13.