Quimby v. Kimberly Clark Corp.
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly granted the defend*661ant’s motion to strike each of the eight counts of the plaintiff’s amended complaint. In its motion to strike, the defendant argued (1) that counts one, two, three, five and six failed to state claims on which relief can be granted “in that the allegations fail to state a common law cause of action based upon alleged violations of the Connecticut Workers’ Compensation Act,” (2) that count four failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted in that it “improperly claimed a violation of the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Mingachos v. CBS, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Nolan v. BorkowskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Manning v. ZuckermanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
- Blancato v. Feldspar Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Mead v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by116 opinions
- Larsen Chelsey Realty Co. v. LarsenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Fink v. GolenbockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Lees v. Middlesex InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Muniz v. KravisConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
- Belz v. Peerless InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2014
111 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.