Legal Opinion
Saunders v. Firtel
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided September 22, 2009No. SC 18309PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ZARELLA, J.
This appeal1 arises out of three separate actions2 initiated by the plaintiff, Barry Saunders,3 against the defendants, Burton Firtel, Adco Medical *518Supplies, Inc. (Adco), and Barbur Associates, LLC (Barbur),4 in which the plaintiff, a former employee of Adco and a member and 50 percent interest holder in Barbur, sought to recover unpaid wages and double damages from Adco under General Statutes §§ 31-71 c5 and 31-72,6 and a judicial dissolution and winding up *519of Barbur pursuant to General Statutes §§ 34-2077 and 34-208.8 The trial court found in favor of the plaintiff on his…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Screws v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Dubay v. IrishSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Schoonmaker v. Lawrence Brunoli, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- State v. SalmonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. ChowdhurySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Stuart v. StuartSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Potvin v. Lincoln Service & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Thomas v. Department of Developmental ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- State v. Rodriguez-RomanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Cohen v. ROLL-A-COVER, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.