Legal Opinion
Zimmerman v. MacDermid, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 4, 1943PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The plaintiff workman was injured on the premises of the defendant and brought this action to recover damages. The sole, question is whether he can-recover at common law or is limited, to his award under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The defendant claims that the work on which he was engaged when injured, which was performed upon the premises of the defendant, was a part or process in the trade or business of the defendant within the provisions of General Statutes, § 5230.
No corrections in the findings are sought. On April 2, 1942, the plaintiff was working as a trucker’s helper for the A.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hoard v. Sears Roebuck Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
- King v. PalmerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- Girard v. KabatznickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kasowitz v. Mutual Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
- Crisanti v. Cremo Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Mancini v. Bureau of Public WorksSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1974
- Lee v. Chevron Oil Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1977
- De Rosa v. Slattery Contracting Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.