Del Core V. Mohican Case Study

1105 Words5 Pages
Should or does a landlord have an obligation to a tenant’s next of kin to inform them in the event of the tenant’s death and in a timely manner? Is the landlord liable for damages? In the case of Del Core v. Mohican Historic Housing these questions were asked of the Judicial District Court at New London in Connecticut. In this report, the facts, the courts involved and the law at issue, and the final ruling by the appellate court will be discussed. Del Core’s brother, Anthony Caruso, had been a tenant with Mohican for approximately three years until his death in July 2001. Mohican knew Del Core was Caruso’s next of kin. After four months and not responding to the hospitals efforts to retrieve Caruso’s next of kin information, Mohican made Del Core aware of the brother’s passing. Del Core sought legal counsel and…show more content…
To show this, the plaintiff claimed that because the defendant knew the plaintiff was Caruso’s next of kin; a duty to the plaintiff was therefore formed. The defendant filed a motion to strike the negligence claim on the grounds that it failed to state a cognizable legal duty and failed to allege facts to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress. (More Law) They also argued that the alleged facts did not show negligence on their part. They instead felt the plaintiff’s allegations of negligence, in its view, were fatally flawed because they failed to establish the existence of any legal relationship that would have imposed on the defendant a duty of care to the plaintiff. (More Law) In Del Core’s view, she felt the defendant’s untimely manner in informing her of her brother’s death would foreseeably hinder her from making proper arrangements for her brother’s burial. In order to show a legal duty was made, the plaintiff would need to establish foreseeability and a determination on the basis of public policy analysis. To establish
Open Document