David Heffernan

The self-represented plaintiff sued his neighbor (the landlord) and two real estate brokerages for $3,000,000, alleging that the tenants placed in the neighboring property engaged in criminal activities that caused him fear and caused a former co-plaintiff to suffer a stroke.

The defendants moved to strike the statement of claim.

The court granted the motion, finding that real estate agents owe no duty of care to a neighboring resident who is a stranger to the real estate transaction.

The court also found that the claim against the landlord failed to plead any material facts establishing negligence or knowledge of the alleged criminal activities, and that the plaintiff failed to plead any damages suffered by himself.

The defendants brought a motion to dismiss the action for delay under Rule 24.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, citing the plaintiffs' two years of inaction and failure to respond to correspondence.

The plaintiffs argued the defendants were in default for not delivering affidavits of documents and offered an explanation for their delay.

The court found the defendants were not in default due to rule amendments and rejected the plaintiffs' explanation as incredible.

However, the court declined to dismiss the action, noting that "contumelious" delay typically requires serial violations of court orders, which was not present.

The motions were dismissed without prejudice, but the plaintiffs were ordered to pay $11,000 in costs to the defendants and to deliver their affidavit of documents within 30 days, with defendants to follow 30 days thereafter.