Ryan Transportation, Inc. v. M & G Associates

Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed judgments for Auto Lock Unlimited, Inc. and M & G Associates arising from a fire that destroyed a building occupied by the plaintiff and Auto Lock. The court held that a commercial cotenant had no duty to notify the plaintiff of a prior arson attempt absent a special relationship involving custody or control. The court declined to review the plaintiff’s evidentiary claim because the appellate record was inadequate to determine whether admission of a bankruptcy decree was harmful.

Holdings

1. A commercial cotenant does not have a duty to protect another cotenant from third-party criminal conduct, including by notifying the cotenant of a prior arson attempt, absent a special relationship involving custody or control, superior ability to protect, or a limitation on the plaintiff's ability to protect itself through submission to the defendant's control.
2. The court declined to review the plaintiff's evidentiary claim because the plaintiff failed to provide an adequate appellate record from which the court could determine whether the alleged evidentiary error was harmful.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a commercial cotenant had a duty to notify another cotenant of a prior, unsuccessful arson attempt and thereby protect the cotenant from a subsequent arson by an unknown third party.
2. Whether the trial court's admission of a final bankruptcy decree to impeach the plaintiff's key witness required reversal of the judgment for the landlord.

Disposition

affirmed