Evanuska v. City of Danbury
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KATZ, J.
The sole issue in this certified appeal is whether the Appellate Court properly affirmed the decision of the workers’ compensation review board (board), affirming the decision of the workers’ compensation commissioner for the seventh district (commissioner), who had concluded that the plaintiffs Douglas Evanuska and Paul Williams, two volunteer firefighters for the defendant city of Danbury, 1 were not engaged in “ ‘fire duties,’ ” as defined in General Statutes § 7-314 (a), 2 when they were injured while repairing the station house roof. See Evanuska v. Danbury, 281 Conn. 923,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hummel v. Marten Transports, Ltd.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Szudora v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- 24 Leggett Street Ltd. Partnership v. Beacon Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Red Hill Coalition, Inc. v. Town Plan & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Gartrell v. Department of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hummel v. Marten Transport, Ltd.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Fiano v. Old Saybrook Fire Co. No. 1, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- Clark v. WaterfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2021
- Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009