Gore v. People’s Savings Bank
Connecticut Supreme Court
235 Conn. 360, 665 A.2d 1341 (1995)
- Written by Patrick Busch, JD
Facts
In 1984, Thomas Gore and Wanda Copeland (plaintiffs), along with their son Kendall Copeland, moved into an apartment in Bridgeport, Connecticut. In 1985, a health inspector discovered lead-based paint in the apartment in amounts that exceeded federal exposure guidelines. The inspector notified the landlords, People’s Savings Bank and M.S.B. Real Estate Corporation (defendants), who then arranged for the paint to be removed. The plaintiffs then brought suit against the defendants on behalf of their son, claiming that the defendants were strictly liable for their son’s exposure to lead-based paint. The trial court entered a directed verdict for the defendants on the strict liability claim, and the plaintiffs appealed. The appellate court reversed, holding that the statute allowed for strict liability for landlords for the presence of lead-based paint, even if the landlords had no notice that there was lead-based paint. The defendants then appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Katz, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
