Legal Opinion · Dissent

Szewczyk v. Department of Social Services

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided May 27, 2003No. AC 22134Published

1DissentLavery, C. J.

I respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the plaintiff, Zbigniew Szewczyk, did not suffer from an emergency medical condition under the definition set forth in either the federal statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1396b (v) (3), or the state regulation, § 3000.01 of the Uniform Policy Manual of the defendant department of social services (department), and was, therefore, not entitled to receive benefits. Accordingly, I would reverse the judgment and *53direct the trial court to remand the matter to the department to grant the plaintiffs application for benefits.

The underlying facts of this…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State v. GeislerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
  2. State v. CourchesneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
  3. City of Waterbury v. Town of WashingtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
  4. Weaver v. ReagenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989
  5. Cotto v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1999

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API