Legal Opinion
Roto-Rooter Services Co. v. Department of Labor
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 16, 1991No. 14116PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGlass, J.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly construed the phrase “commissions on . . . services” in General Statutes § 31-761 (g),1 *522which exempts certain employers from the overtime pay requirements of General Statutes § 31-76c,2 to mean commissions earned by employees who only sell services. Because we conclude that the phrase also encompasses commissions earned by employees who perform services, we reverse.
This appeal arises from an administrative ruling by the defendant, the department of labor,3 determining that the plaintiff, Roto-Rooter Services Company, did not…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Sanzone v. Board of Police CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Kostas Mechmet v. Four Seasons Hotels, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Connecticut State Medical Society v. Connecticut Board of ExaminersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Winslow v. Lewis-Shepard, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Connecticut Hospital Ass'n v. Commission on Hospitals & Health CareSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Williams Ford, Inc. v. Hartford Courant Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Mytych v. May Department Stores Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1999
- Fahy v. FahySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- State v. GuckianConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Mytych v. May Department Stores Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.