Legal Opinion
Mathurin v. City of Putnam
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 31, 1950No. 3118; 3119PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDickenson, J.
In the first of these appeals the city of Putnam and its insurer have appealed from a decision of the Superior Court confirming an award of compensation to the plaintiff to be paid by them. In the second appeal, the same two defendants have appealed from the dismissal by the Superior Court of an appeal from the denial of a motion which they made to reopen the award and in which they claimed that by mistake the award was made against them when it should have been made against the town of Putnam and its insurer.
Some question has arisen whether it was proper in this case to take separate appeals…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State ex rel. Bulkeley v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
- State v. KempSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Zygmuntowicz v. American Steel & Wire Co. of New JerseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Lake v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Hiss v. HissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Fair v. People's Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Adzima v. UAC/Norden DivisionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Marone v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Besade v. Interstate Security ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Six v. Thomas O'Connor & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.