Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Ciarlelli v. TOWN OF HAMDEN

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 21, 2010No. SC 18201Published

1ConcurrenceZarella, J.

I agree with the result reached by the majority. I write separately, however, because, in my view, nothing in General Statutes § 7-433c1 requires that notice of hypertension or heart disease be given to a municipal employer within a specified period of time in order for a claimant to receive compensation. I am aware that our precedent has repeatedly *302interpreted § 7-433c to require claimants to comply with the notice provisions relating to accidental injuries contained in the Workers’ Compensation Act (act), General Statutes § 31-294c (a);2 see, e.g., Collins v. West Haven, 210 Conn. 423, 430,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. White v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  2. Barden v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  3. Conway v. Town of WiltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  4. Bellemare v. Wachovia Mortgage Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
  5. Town of Plainville v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1979

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