Legal Opinion

Panaro v. Electrolux Corp.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided August 16, 1988No. 13402PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArthur H. Healey, J.

The sole issue on this appeal is whether the defendant Mary Ann Sheehan, a full-time salaried company nurse, has the status of an independent contractor at her place of employment and therefore may be sued by a fellow employee despite the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act. General Statutes § 31-275 et seq. The named plaintiff, Anthony Panaro, brought an action for malpractice against his employer, the Electrolux Corporation (Electrolux), the named defendant, and the defendant Sheehan, a nurse employed by Electrolux. The plaintiffs1 alleged that Sheehan’s failure to…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Mingachos v. CBS, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  2. Blancato v. Feldspar Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  3. McKelvy v. BarberTexas Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Duprey v. ShaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. State v. KishSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Doe v. Yale UniversitySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
  2. Quimby v. Kimberly Clark Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1992
  3. Dowling v. SlotnikSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  4. Sharp v. MitchellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  5. Durniak v. August Winter & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1992

34 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