Today we continue to examine the case of Glastonbury Healthcare Center, Inc. v. Esposito. In the first post, we found out how the Court bound a resident’s son to the terms of a nursing home contract that he never signed. Now, we are going to take a closer look at exactly how Carmine Esposito breached the contract which led to the nursing home prevailing in its claim for over $100,000 against him.

There are two provisions in the contract that Carmine was accused of breaching. These provisions are: Read more…

Visitors to Title19CT.com already know that Connecticut nursing homes have been getting more aggressive in attempting to recover losses due to botched Connecticut Medicaid applications. For example, Newington Health Care Center recently sued the daughter of a resident for just under $16,000. Understanding where other families went wrong is critical to helping you not make the same mistakes.

Today we begin our adventure through the case of Glastonbury Healthcare Center, Inc. v. Esposito. And I do mean adventure. The end result is the nursing home was successful in its claim against the resident’s son for over $100,000. Our job is to understand how they won their case and how you can avoid having the same happen to you.

There is so much ground to cover in this case that it is going to take several posts to dissect it all.

The players involved:

• Carmine Esposito – the Defendant;
• Josephine Esposito – the Defendant’s mother and resident of Glastonbury Healthcare Center;
• Glastonbury Healthcare Center – the Plaintfiff;
• Lucy Higgins – admissions officer for Glastonbury Healthcare center;
• Laura Catarino – Connecticut DSS case worker;
• Attorney Michael Bellobuono – represented Carmine Esposito.

On April 1, 1998 Josephine became a resident of Glastonbury Healthcare Center.

Carmine Esposito met with the admissions officer Lucy Higgins on April 2nd. Lucy presented Carmine with the Admissions Agreement at that meeting and Carmine signed it under the power of attorney from Josephine. He did not sign the agreement as Responsible Party. The contract contained two significant provisions: Read more…