Legal Opinion
Conetta v. City of Stamford
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 11, 1998No. SC 15807PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KATZ, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether, at this particular stage of the proceedings, we have jurisdiction to consider the defendant’s appeal. We conclude that we do not. Accordingly, we are constrained to dismiss the appeal.
The record discloses the following undisputed facts. The plaintiff, Michael Conetta, became a police officer for the named defendant, the city of Stamford (defendant),1 on August 10, 1970. On July 7,1985, the plaintiff failed to report to work due to a psychiatric episode, which he claimed arose out of and in the course of his employment. At the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- State v. CurcioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Loisel v. RoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. CostleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Cameron v. CameronSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Fair v. People's Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Hummel v. Marten Transports, Ltd.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Rayhall v. Akim Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- City of Hartford v. Hartford Municipal Employees Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Doe v. Connecticut Bar Examining CommitteeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Willow Funding Co., L.P. v. Grencom AssociatesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.